Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 30330

 1                           Thursday, 15 November 2012

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

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

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, everyone.

 6             Yes, Mr. Tieger, today -- I said yesterday that we would hear you

 7     first thing today.

 8             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Mr. President.  Before I begin with the issue

 9     raised by the Chamber at the end of the session yesterday, I might

10     mention the resolution of the scheduling issue which was also on our

11     agenda.  This is -- we did discuss the matter with the Defence.  This was

12     an impressive example, actually, of both sides doing their utmost to

13     compromise and offering concessions in their previous positions to

14     accommodate the other.  In this case, we made the last accommodation and

15     urged them to go through the door first.  So we'll be moving forward on

16     the schedule that Mr. Robinson proposed.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Tieger.  The Chamber appreciates the

18     parties' co-operation very much.  Thank you.

19             MR. TIEGER:  And I mentioned to Mr. Robinson this morning in --

20     also that I would at the same time note another issue that's been on the

21     table which, unfortunately, has not resolved it in the same level of

22     progress and that's the issue of the failure to comply with 65 ter and

23     the absence of adequate factual summaries and/or statements.  We took

24     certain steps toward resolving that, but those turned out to be utterly

25     ineffectual, that is, we -- I won't go into the details, but the

Page 30331

 1     anticipated first step toward resolving it that the Prosecution expected

 2     to receive from the Defence did not turn out to be an effective measure

 3     in any way.  So that issue is still very much on the table.  We are going

 4     to address it with greater intensity during the break, if we can, but

 5     that may be something we'll be bringing to the attention of the

 6     Trial Chamber and I wanted to alert the Trial Chamber to that

 7     possibility.

 8             That said, Mr. President, I wanted to speak on the issue that you

 9     asked me to address and that is the time spent by the Prosecution in

10     cross-examination.  By way of background, I note that you indicated,

11     among other things, that the Prosecution had used much more time in

12     cross-examination than the Defence used in examination and

13     re-examination, that the evidence presented by these witnesses was

14     limited, with short statements, very few associated exhibits and - as

15     mentioned - often a limited number of issues.  I hope I won't spend too

16     much time telling you why the Prosecution is not taking too much time,

17     but given the amount of time available between last night and this

18     morning, this may be a case of it takes more time to prepare a short

19     letter than a longer one, but I'll do my best.

20             I'd like to note preliminarily that there is no gap, no friction,

21     no conflict between the Court's interest in the most efficient possible

22     cross-examinations and therefore the most efficient possible trial and

23     the Prosecution's interest in exactly the same thing.  We want to move

24     forward as expeditiously as we can while remaining true to the mandate to

25     maintain a trial that pursues the ascertainment of the truth and the

Page 30332

 1     achievement of justice.  And we feel that actually given our extensive

 2     knowledge of the case, we are in the best possible position to assess the

 3     balance between the issues needed to be raised in cross-examination and

 4     those extremely significant responsibilities.

 5             And as we've progressed, we've attempted to identify areas where

 6     such efficiencies can take place.  The Court will have noted the

 7     recurring themes that seem to arise in statement after statement.  We

 8     consider that to the extent we have effectively dealt with those with

 9     certain witnesses, that to the extent those tend to arise with similarly

10     situated witnesses, we do not need to spend as much time or indeed,

11     perhaps, any time addressing those same issues which have been thrashed

12     out and clarified with previous witnesses.

13             And we also constantly meet to identify basically the state of

14     play with respect to the kinds of issues that are raised by witnesses,

15     all in the interest of making the examinations as short and effective as

16     they can possibly be.  And I would emphasize that a great deal of

17     out-of-court time, an enormous amount of out-of-court time goes into just

18     that effort.

19             But I wanted to actually turn to the Court's specific points

20     about the balance between the length of the statements, the amount of

21     time taken in direct examination and re-examination, and the time taken

22     by the Prosecution for cross-examination.  And I hope I can shed some

23     light on factors that may not have been immediately apparent.

24             Frankly, it -- while it may be correct that the statements

25     comprise fewer pages than statements, for example, submitted by the

Page 30333

 1     Prosecution during the course of its case, it is simply not the case that

 2     there is any necessary relationship between the issues -- the

 3     significance and number of issues raised and the number of pages that a

 4     statement comprises, nor is there any relationship between the number of

 5     pages and the difficulty, complexity, or necessary length of a

 6     cross-examination, and let me explain.

 7             With respect to the format, that is, that there's no necessary

 8     relationship between the length of a statement and the number of issues

 9     raised or the need for time spent in cross-examination, the reductio

10     ad absurdum of that is frankly something I've mentioned to students, for

11     example, in the course of discussions about this very issue in making

12     that very point, and that's a situation where to make the point you would

13     say:  Look, what if somebody comes in and says, I was with the accused

14     the entire length of the war or the entire length of the -- and take a

15     domestic case of the events at issue months and months and years and

16     years, and that person committed no crime.  You now have ten seconds to

17     cross-examine.  Now, that sounds absurd, but in a sense that's the

18     situation we are facing here.  We have commander after commander after

19     commander coming in with sweeping statements about what happened along

20     the lines of:  We always complied with IHL, we never fired into the

21     depth, we only received orders to obey international humanitarian law, we

22     never fired at civilians.  Now, those issues cover basically the entirety

23     of the Prosecution case and compel cross-examination.  So they put

24     virtually everything on the table.  The Prosecution has no recourse but

25     to address those things.

Page 30334

 1             Now, the paradox is that by doing it in that way, not only do

 2     those statements require us to cover a vast array of issues, but they

 3     make it more difficult to do so because it's incumbent then upon the

 4     Prosecution to identify the underlying factors that allow for a

 5     meaningful cross-examination that are not covered in a statement.  So

 6     it's vastly easier when much of the background work has been done by a

 7     detailed statement that lets you know who, what, where, and how so you

 8     can really get to the crux of the issue rather than having to reconstruct

 9     it during the course of the cross-examination.

10             Just as a -- the same thing is true, for example, of associated

11     exhibits.  The number of associated exhibits, whether -- the fact that

12     there are few associated exhibits doesn't necessarily mean there's

13     less -- there's less time needed for cross-examination.  It can be just

14     the opposite, and one example that comes to mind is the very first

15     cross-examination.  The Court may recall that a large number of

16     additional paragraphs and quite a significant volume, dozens and dozens

17     of additional exhibits were added at the last minute to the statement.

18     Now, that did not expand the estimated time for cross-examination.

19     Indeed, the Prosecution took significantly less time than it had

20     originally estimated, and part of the reason was that those additional

21     exhibits gave us access to information that allowed us to effectively

22     cross-examine the witness directly.  So, for example, we were able to

23     expose the mis-characterisation of the Vrbanja bridge incident on the

24     basis of a document that was an associated exhibit that indicated that

25     contemporaneously the witness was aware that what had been said in --

Page 30335

 1     what he was now saying in the statement was not true.

 2             So that's one example of the seemingly paradoxical relationship

 3     between the length of the -- the length of a statement and the length of

 4     cross-examination and the fact that it's important to reject the idea

 5     that a short statement necessarily means a short cross.  It's not the

 6     case at all, as I noted.

 7             Now, I mentioned earlier the -- what I consider to be the

 8     extraordinary efforts behind the scenes that the Prosecution makes to

 9     identify relevant documents, relevant issues, that should be brought to

10     the Court's attention to illuminate the issues and simultaneously

11     determine which of the issues raised in the statement need to be raised.

12     And I need to emphasize that this was -- this has not been the case where

13     the Prosecution has simply reflexively marched through the statement,

14     addressing issue after issue raised by the Defence in those statements.

15     I didn't have time to canvass the team generally or cover the

16     cross-examinations in their entirety, but a simple quick review indicated

17     that there were large amounts - many, many paragraphs of many, many

18     statements - that we simply discarded because either the focus was on the

19     general credibility of the witness or because we considered them

20     sufficiently peripheral or marginal that they should not consume the time

21     of the Court.  And all of that is reflected in the stats that I've been

22     able to gather about the cross-examinations and the time we've had.

23             So here, for example, I have the statistics for the estimated

24     times for cross-examination and the times that the Prosecution has taken.

25     I think it's a very impressive table.  We've come in under, as the Court

Page 30336

 1     mentioned a few days ago, asking us to be alert to the fact that we were

 2     being more efficient in cross-examination than we had appreciated and to

 3     try to make those estimates conform a little more closely to where we

 4     ended up, but they're modest -- relatively modest estimates and they are

 5     very, very impressive results based on those cross-examinations.

 6             I also want to mention, by the way, that there was never an

 7     instance where a reduced time for cross-examination, that is, the

 8     difference between the estimate and the time we actually took threatened

 9     that there would not be a witness here because we were in contact with

10     the Defence and Mr. Robinson throughout.  So they were always aware of

11     the most contemporary and most current estimate.

12             A similar statistic, Mr. President, is --

13             JUDGE KWON:  Just staying there.  What number do you have in --

14     the estimate versus actual time?

15             MR. TIEGER:  I don't have that percentage.  What I have is -- I

16     was just looking down the individual -- and I can read some of them and

17     the majority come in as -- I mean, I can read them off one at a time,

18     it's a bit anecdotal, but I was highlighting the ones that were -- so I

19     look at the first one, the first estimate was 5.5, it came in at under

20     3 and a half.  The second one was 4, it came in at under an hour.  The

21     third one was 4.5, it came in under 3 hours, and so on.

22             JUDGE KWON:  In total I think the actual time is about

23     57 per cent of your estimate.

24             MR. TIEGER:  Okay.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Please continue, yes, Mr. Tieger.

Page 30337

 1             MR. TIEGER:  And really, Mr. President, that is not because we've

 2     inflated the estimates.  It's because we've been constantly working to

 3     identify what really needs to be done and, as you would expect and as I

 4     kind of alluded to at the beginning of my discussion, the more you work

 5     on something the more you're in a position to make it more efficient and

 6     that's what's been happening.

 7             A similar example of the efficiency of the Prosecution, I

 8     believe, can be found in the percentages of time used by the parties.

 9     And what I can tell the Court is that based on our statistics, it appears

10     that the Prosecution is -- that the same percentages of time are being

11     used by the parties as during the Prosecution case.  And why is that

12     significant?  It's significant because, as you can see, the Defence is

13     using scarcely any time in its tendering of the 92 ter submissions.  And

14     that would mean if the Prosecution was maintaining the same level of

15     efficiency in cross-examination, that is, was taking -- consuming the

16     same amount in cross-examination that the Defence had used, that our

17     percentage of time taken in the course of this case would obviously

18     increase; that is, now the Defence takes no time in tendering the

19     statements.  Obviously then the time taken for cross-examination would

20     consume a much greater percentage of the overall allotment.  But that's

21     not the case.  These percentages have remained the same and they've

22     remained the same because the Prosecution has tried just as hard to keep

23     these examinations as efficient as possible.

24             Now, I tried to promise at the beginning that I wouldn't take

25     more time than necessary and perhaps I've overstayed my welcome in that

Page 30338

 1     respect, but I want to emphasize two things.  And that is that the

 2     Prosecution is willing at all times to take on further guidance about

 3     where Prosecution -- where examinations can be conducted more efficiently

 4     and we will certainly take those suggestions on board.  But I think it's

 5     important to emphasize that the role of the Prosecution in

 6     cross-examination is central to the identification of the evidence

 7     necessary for this Trial Chamber to make the significant decisions it has

 8     to make.  Nothing, in our submission, that the Prosecution has done thus

 9     far would suggest or, much less, warrant the imposition of time-limits.

10     We think quite the contrary.  And we think to do so would jeopardise

11     potentially our ability to get you the information that you need and

12     deserve.

13             Thank you, Mr. President.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Just one -- with respect to the ratio referred to,

15     to the effect that the ratio during the Defence case so far is similar to

16     that during the Prosecution case, did you not from time to time or

17     oftentimes that the time spent by the Defence was unreasonably too

18     lengthy?

19             MR. TIEGER:  One thing I wanted to -- you know, I noted that one

20     thing in the course of -- in the effort to be as quick as possible, one

21     thing I didn't mention that I wanted to mention earlier and that is I did

22     say that the Prosecution has attempted to be as efficient as possible.  I

23     wanted to explicitly mention that among the things the Prosecution has

24     avoided is dealing with topics not raised by the statement, dealing with

25     peripheral topics, trying to address every statement, unnecessary

Page 30339

 1     arguments the witness -- and I could go on, basically avoided all those

 2     factors that prompted the Prosecution during the course of the -- of its

 3     case and during the course of Defence examinations to note that time

 4     might not be used as efficiently as possible.  And I think for the most

 5     part, by the way, we - with the exception of the very beginning of the

 6     case when those issues tended to be raised - I think we largely refrained

 7     from assessments of how much time should be allotted to the Defence, if

 8     any, and how it should be handled directly in favour of simply

 9     identifying at any given moment whether a relevant issue was being

10     addressed or whether the accused was needlessly pursuing an issue that

11     was not productive.

12             So I certainly would -- I'm not going to dispute the fact that we

13     didn't disagree with the Trial Chamber's assessment that the accused's

14     cross-examinations were not as efficient as possible and very, very

15     often - if not almost uniformly - ventured into unnecessary areas in

16     unproductive ways.  So I -- you're right, I don't want to compare

17     those -- to make a comparison between our obligations to be as efficient

18     as possible and what the accused did.  But I think my point was that

19     given -- given the fact that the Trial Chamber did impose limits and

20     tried to keep it within a reasonable period of time, the fact that we are

21     maintaining the same percentage now is a testimonial to our efforts to

22     keep those cross-examinations as efficient as possible.

23             I'd also mention - I think it needs to be said because I think

24     it's fair - I think the Court was careful at all times, insofar as I

25     recall, to make it clear to the accused that to the extent he can -- he

Page 30340

 1     was dealing with issues fairly and efficiently, the Court would not

 2     constrain him.  And I think the Court emphasized that time and again, and

 3     I -- for all the reasons that I've explained, I submit that the

 4     Prosecution is dealing with these cross-examinations as efficiently as it

 5     possibly can and will continue to do so and refine the efficiency even

 6     further.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have any observation, Mr. Robinson?

 8             MR. ROBINSON:  No.  Thank you, Mr. President.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not going to respond to

11     Mr. Tieger.  I can only say that based on their difficulties, it would be

12     easier to perceive what difficulties the Defence encounters given their

13     limited resources.  I would like to apologise to the Trial Chamber and

14     especially Judge Morrison for interrupting his question the day before

15     yesterday; however, with all due respect for the efforts of the

16     interpreters, neither I nor the witness received that as the

17     interpretation of a question but rather as a statement.  Some other

18     interventions of mine arise from that.  I'm concerned because of the --

19     because of mistakes in the interpretation.  Sometimes even erroneous

20     statements in the Prosecutor's questions which may influence the course

21     of the examination.  My interventions during additional questions may be

22     belated when we're talking about misquotations or misinterpretations.  I

23     beg your indulgence, please allow me to intervene with corrections in the

24     transcript or corrections when questions contain misquotations.

25             And once again, I would like to apologise to His Excellency

Page 30341

 1     Judge Morrison for having interrupted his intervention.

 2             JUDGE MORRISON:  That's very kind, Dr. Karadzic, but I don't

 3     think an apology is actually necessary.  I certainly didn't perceive that

 4     one was necessary.  For myself, if the transcript is not accurate then

 5     it -- it assists everybody if there is an intervention to correct it.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Can I reiterate here now again that it's imperative

 7     on your part to advise the witnesses from the region to speak slow, given

 8     that they -- the situation regarding the interpretation.

 9             MR. TIEGER:  Mr. President, I'm sorry, if I could make one

10     quick --

11             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

12             MR. TIEGER:  -- sorry, just one quick point about the

13     interpretation and maybe it stands -- it's a bit obvious, but everyone

14     would have to share Judge Morrison's observation.  However, one thing we

15     have noted and that occurred yesterday when the interpreter said --

16     following an intervention:  Well, that's the same thing.  In other words,

17     it's another way of saying the same thing.  So there are many ways or

18     there are often situations where there are synonyms that are basically

19     identical.  If we're going to have interventions that identify such

20     synonyms because Mr. Karadzic thinks that he would have chosen a

21     different one, that will be rather cumbersome.  So I think he's going to

22     need to distinguish between genuine problems and circumstances that don't

23     change the meaning of what was translated in a meaningful way.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 30342

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, thank you, Mr. Tieger.  We'll consider your

 2     submission.

 3             Shall we bring in the next witness.

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, ma'am.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Would you take the solemn declaration.

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

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

10                           WITNESS:  ZELJKA MALINOVIC

11                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

12             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Ms. Malinovic.  If you could take a seat.

13             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

14                           Examination by Mr. Karadzic:

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Ms. Malinovic.

16        A.   Good morning, Mr. President.

17        Q.   Please feel relaxed.  Things proceed very smoothly here.  I have

18     to remind myself of something and I have to tell you that we should make

19     brief pauses between questions and answers for the sake of the

20     interpreters.  I would also like to ask you to speak slowly so that

21     everything can be interpreted.

22        A.   Very well.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D6233, please.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Did you give the Defence team a statement and is this the

Page 30343

 1     statement that you can see before you on the screen?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Does this statement reflect everything that you had

 4     to say?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Is everything that you stated correctly recorded and were you

 7     able to verify it and read through your statement?

 8        A.   Everything was accurately recorded, I checked that.  I read

 9     through my statement.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Did you sign this statement?

11        A.   Yes, I did.

12        Q.   Thank you.  If I were to put the same questions to you here today

13     viva voce, would your answers be the same in substance?

14        A.   Yes, absolutely.

15        Q.   Thank you.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could I tender this packet into

17     evidence pursuant to 92 ter, Rule 92 ter?  I believe we have

18     five associated documents and this statement.

19                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

20             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Robinson, before I hear from the Prosecution,

21     I'm not sure whether those documents are relevant or necessary for the

22     purpose of this case.

23             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President.  Well, they corroborate a

24     portion of her statement, but I'll leave it to you as to whether you

25     think that needs to be corroborated or not.  And in the event you do

Page 30344

 1     admit them, I would ask that two of them that were not on our 65 ter list

 2     be allowed to be added, and that's the first one, 15020 and 15024.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  I'm of the view that we can do without

 4     them.

 5             We'll admit the statement.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D2443, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency.  I will

 9     now read out a summary of Mrs. Malinovic's statement in English.

10             [In English] Zeljka Malinovic is a medical technician by

11     profession.  She worked at the Novi Grad - Otoka clinic until May the

12     2nd, 1992.  The medical staff was ethnically mixed but intra-ethnic

13     relations among the staff had already begun to deteriorate from the

14     autumn 1991.

15             The establishment of the multi-party system in the territory of

16     BH led to the first intra-ethnic disputes in the town of Sarajevo.  At

17     their rallies in the town and surrounding area, the Muslims and Croats

18     glorified the struggle for the secessionist forces in Croatia and erected

19     an open front toward the Serbs, who began to feel afraid and anxious

20     about their like and coexistence in the territory in BH.  Because of

21     these tensions, barricades sprung up on all major roads in the early

22     spring of 1992.  Muslims and Serbs set up the barricades in the areas

23     where they were a majority, while Croats were mostly on the barricades

24     together with the Muslims.

25             At the beginning of March 1992, most barricades on the roads were

Page 30345

 1     removed but groups of armed Muslim civilians remained at all important

 2     junctions, checking day and night the papers of the civilians passing

 3     through their controls.  These were members of the Patriotic League and

 4     the Green Berets.  Once they had established, by looking at the identity

 5     cards, that someone was Serb, they would conduct the check in a cynical

 6     and humiliating manner.  These Muslim paramilitary formations also made

 7     lists for parts of the town and the apartment buildings where Serbs lived

 8     and searched them under the pretense of looking for radio transmitter

 9     sets and weapons.  In addition to this, they would also forcibly take

10     into custody and lead away Serbian civilians.  Those taken into custody

11     would be held for hours, interrogated, threatened, and maltreated, all

12     this usually conducted in improvised areas such as entrances of buildings

13     and business premises.  Her father was detained twice.

14             In mid-April 1992, three members of the Green Berets searched her

15     apartment, conducting themselves in a rough manner and threatening to

16     kill her and her family.  Feared for their lives and considered the

17     possibility of fleeing to a Serb majority area until the situation

18     stabilised.  Whenever Serbs put complaints to the MUP, police, in

19     Sarajevo about these issues concerning the Muslim paramilitaries, they

20     would be harassed and maltreated even more and often also labelled as

21     sniper shooters, regardless of whether they were males or females.  They

22     would be taken to improvised prisons from where they hardly ever

23     returned.  This evidences the complicity between the legal forces of the

24     MUP and illegal paramilitary formations.

25             In late April 1992, Slavisa Kravljaca was taken away and tortured

Page 30346

 1     by members of the Green Berets by having nails hammered under his

 2     fingernails.  After that, they took Kravljaca to Zavnobih Square where a

 3     crowd of Muslim men and women stoned him.

 4             Alongside the medical staff, there would be ten Green Berets

 5     members armed with automatic rifles.  In the afternoon they would fire in

 6     bursts through the clinic's windows in the direction of the Viktor Bubanj

 7     barracks where a JNA unit was billeted.  They also swore at the Serbs and

 8     announced that they would soon raze the Serb settlement of Nedzarici to

 9     the ground, and sow wheat where the Serb houses stood.  That day she

10     decided she would not go back to work and she and her mother left to

11     Nedzarici.  Her father, Uros, and her brother remained in the flat, an

12     area which like the broader Alipasino Polje area was controlled by

13     Juka Prazina, a renowned pre-war criminal whose soldiers were mostly

14     people from criminal circles.  Juka Prazina's unit was supported by parts

15     of the so-called Laste Special Unit.

16             Zeljka Malinovic met many exchanged Serb girls and women who had

17     been raped by Muslim forces.  They were only exchanged once they had

18     reached their seventh or eighth month of pregnancy and could no longer

19     have an abortion.

20             After the formation of the VRS on the 12th of May, 1992, she

21     joined the army as a volunteer and was assigned to the medical battalion

22     in Nedzarici, where she stayed until 5th of May, 1993.  Her unit engaged

23     exclusively in defensive operations aimed to protect all civilians in its

24     rear.  They intervened daily taking care of wounded and killed Serbs,

25     more than 350 persons in one year, the majority of which were civilians.

Page 30347

 1     Most wounds were to the head and the upper body due to the sniper fire by

 2     Muslim soldiers.  Others were caused by random actions of the Muslim

 3     artillery against Nedzarici.

 4             Serbian forces in -- on the Nedzarici front were in an inferior

 5     position vis-a-vis Muslim forces, positioned at higher buildings.

 6     Nedzarici was completely encircled by Muslim forces.  The only road her

 7     unit has -- had was the Kasindolska Street, Ilidza, along which it was

 8     only possible to move at night due to Muslim fire.  Muslim forces also

 9     cut off the supply of electricity and water to the part of Nedzarici

10     under Serbian control.

11             Muslim forces fired at her unit's ambulance whenever they had the

12     opportunity, regardless it was marked with the red cross in line with the

13     regulations.  In her year of service, out of 11 members of her unit eight

14     were wounded during interventions.  UNPROFOR members witnessed some of

15     these incidents and had to intervene at least on one occasion to protect

16     the ambulance.  Muslim forces also systematically violated truce

17     agreements, while claiming in the media that violations had been on the

18     Serb side.  This usually happened when either international forces or

19     foreign journalists were on the line.

20             Exchanged Serbs from Sarajevo were starved and physically

21     maltreated by members of the Muslim formations.  After every attack

22     casualties would also be exchanged.  Serbs exchanged the bodies of killed

23     Muslim soldiers while Muslims would return bodies of Serbian civilians.

24             With regard to Zeljka Malinovic's father, Uros Rakanovic, he was

25     arrested on 31st of May, 1992, by the Green Berets, interrogated, and

Page 30348

 1     physically maltreated.  On 2nd of June, 1992, he was arrested again and

 2     beaten up during interrogations, the result of which was both legs and

 3     most of his ribs broken.  The following day he was taken to the front

 4     line to call out to Zeljka Malinovic and her brother to surrender.  After

 5     this he was taken to the central prison in Sarajevo where he spent

 6     24 days until his transfer to Viktor Bubanj prison, where he died on

 7     11th of November, 1992.  On 28 of September, 2006, on the basis of DNA

 8     analysis her father's remains were identified and recovered in the

 9     Lav cemetery, lion's cemetery, in Sarajevo.  The autopsy established that

10     all his ribs and both legs were broken and the lower jaw was missing.

11             [Interpretation] I don't have any questions for Mrs. Malinovic at

12     this point in time.  What I have just read out is the summary.  I'm

13     waiting for the interpretation.  I do apologise.  This was the summary

14     and I would like to tender this statement into evidence.  And if the

15     exhibits are of any help to the Chamber, I would like to tender them too.

16             JUDGE KWON:  We dealt with it.

17             Any further questions, Mr. Karadzic?

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Not at this point in time,

19     Your Excellency.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, Ms. Iodice.  If -- my apology if my

21     pronunciation is not correct, but I forgot to ask when Mr. Karadzic

22     tendered the 92 ter statement -- but I took it that there was no

23     objection?

24             MS. IODICE:  That's correct, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

Page 30349

 1             Mrs. Malinovic, as you have noted, your evidence in chief was

 2     admitted in this case in writing in lieu of your oral testimony.  Now you

 3     will be further cross-examined by the Prosecution.

 4             Yes, Ms. Iodice.

 5             MS. IODICE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6                           Cross-examination by Ms. Iodice:

 7        Q.   Good morning, Mrs. Malinovic.

 8        A.   Good morning, good morning.

 9        Q.   Thank you for meeting with me the day before yesterday.  First I

10     would like to ask you about the circumstances of your Defence statement.

11     The day before yesterday you told me that you have been following the

12     trial from the beginning; is that correct?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And that you volunteered to become a witness; correct?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And you gave your statement over the phone, more or less,

17     six months ago; correct?

18        A.   First I gave it in person.  That's what I told Mr. Zoran Vlasic.

19        Q.   All right.  And then you saw it written down for the first time

20     in The Hague and that's when you signed it; right?

21        A.   Yes, when I met Mr. President, Mr. Marko gave it to me to sign

22     and he provided me with the statement here in The Hague.

23        Q.   And when we met, you made a small correction to your statement.

24     You said there is a mistake in paragraph 10 where it is written that the

25     shooting at the Otoka clinic happened in the afternoon.  You corrected

Page 30350

 1     that and said it was in the evening; is that right?

 2        A.   Well, it happened around 1900 hours, to be precise, so it was in

 3     the early evening and continued until late at night.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  And this is a single incident that took place on the

 5     1st of May, correct, between the night of the 1st of May to the

 6     2nd of May?

 7        A.   Yes, absolutely.

 8        Q.   Thank you.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to comment on the

10     interpretation.  It says "one," but -- or it was said "one," but the

11     interpretation was "the only."  That is what the answer depends on.  [In

12     English] "The only," [Interpretation] It was translated as "one" in the

13     Serbian language instead of "the only."

14             JUDGE KWON:  I don't see much difference.  Let us continue.

15             MS. IODICE:  Thank you, Your Honours.

16        Q.   So now I would like to discuss the check-point in the searches

17     that you discuss in paragraph 5 of your statement.  You mentioned that

18     each ethnicity set up barricades in the part of town where they were the

19     majority.  And so when in paragraph 7 you say that the movement of

20     citizens was entirely controlled by the Green Berets and the

21     Patriotic League, you are referring to the parts of town where Muslims

22     were the majority; is that correct?

23        A.   Yes, absolutely.

24        Q.   Thank you.  And when in paragraph 7 you say that the Muslim

25     paramilitary formations made lists of Serb apartments to be searched, I

Page 30351

 1     take it that you've never seen these lists; correct?

 2        A.   No, I haven't seen the lists, but I heard about such things.  I

 3     was told that they did such things.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Let's now discuss the torture and stoning of

 5     Slavisa Kravljaca in Zavnobih Square.  Did you personally know this man?

 6        A.   No, my brother did.

 7        Q.   And you say that was a -- he was a civil servant.  What exactly

 8     did he do?  What was his job?

 9        A.   I don't understand the question.

10        Q.   In your statement you said that Slavisa Kravljaca was a civil

11     servant by profession.

12        A.   No.  Slavisa Kravljaca was a Serb from Nedzarici who went to have

13     a coffee in the cafe that he would go to before the war.  I didn't say

14     that he was a statesman.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Let's -- let us upload the statement -- I think it

16     is in front of you.  Do you have a hard copy with you, Ms. Malinovic?

17     It's --

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do.  Yes, yes.

19             JUDGE KWON:  It's paragraph 9.

20             MS. IODICE:

21        Q.   If you look towards the end of paragraph 9, when you say:

22             "In late April 1992 ..."

23        A.   Here it is.

24             Slavisa Kravljaca was taken in, he was maltreated, members of the

25     Green Berets, and so on and so forth.  So he was a civilian who went to

Page 30352

 1     have a coffee in the cafe that he would visit before the war.  He was a

 2     17-year-old young man.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Do you see your statement there, six lines from the

 4     bottom in para 9 it says:  April 1992, Slavisa Kravljaca, and civil.

 5     It's translated "a civil servant."  You said he was a civil servant?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A civilian.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 8             MS. IODICE:

 9        Q.   Thank you for clarifying that.  And did you hear about Kravljaca

10     having nails hammered under his fingernails from others or did you see

11     his hands?

12        A.   A man who was my neighbour told me about this.  He was a medical

13     technician, as I was, because there was a clinic toward -- next to my

14     building and they brought him there.  He pulled the nails out of his

15     fingers.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There is something that is missing

17     because the witness said this was something she was told by a man who

18     personally took the nails out of his fingers.

19             MS. IODICE:

20        Q.   Can you confirm that's what you said?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Did you personally witness the actual stoning when it took place?

23        A.   I saw my neighbours who went there and they called on me to stone

24     him.  I remained in the stairwell of my building.  When they returned

25     they asked me why hadn't I gone there.  One of them boasted about having

Page 30353

 1     looked for a large stone to hit him with so that it would hurt him as

 2     much as possible.  But I didn't go there.  I couldn't --

 3        Q.   So you didn't see it happening?

 4        A.   -- couldn't watch that.  No, I didn't, but I heard the noise.  It

 5     was near my building.  Do you understand me when I say "the

 6     noise" - that's the term we use - it means the screaming, the crying out,

 7     the noise, these ugly words, the racket.

 8        Q.   Do you know if he survived?

 9        A.   Yes.  I personally met him in Nedzarici.

10        Q.   And did you ever report this event to -- during or after the war,

11     including to the Serb authorities in Bijeljina?

12        A.   I don't understand.  Which events?  Are you referring to

13     Slavisa Kravljaca?  I can't answer because I don't understand your

14     question.

15        Q.   Yes.  Did you report the stoning of Kravljaca to the Serb

16     authorities at any point?

17        A.   Let me tell you this.  I had no need to make a statement.  On a

18     couple of occasions he appeared on our TV, so he described the event

19     himself.  So there was no need for me to go and confirm his statement

20     anywhere else.

21        Q.   Do you know the names of the people who took part in it?  You

22     said they were your neighbours.  Do you remember any names?

23        A.   You know what?  I remember very few of my neighbours from my

24     building.  I'm seeking to forget because of my father.  Those were women.

25     Those were primarily women.  Women were the main protagonists of that

Page 30354

 1     event.

 2        Q.   And -- and do you -- the square where the incident took place was

 3     the square where you lived; correct?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And it was surrounded by high-rise apartment buildings; is that

 6     correct?

 7        A.   The square -- yes, yes.  It is indeed surrounded by high-rise

 8     apartment buildings.

 9        Q.   And as you said, it was very noisy so many people would have seen

10     or heard what was happening?

11        A.   Yes, yes.

12        Q.   Mrs. Malinovic, we -- so many people took part or, anyway,

13     somehow heard or witnessed this incident, and yet in 20 years we never

14     heard anything about it.  We heard of many crimes.  We heard of the

15     shooting of the wedding guest in Bascarsija, and do you think that after

16     20 years such an horrific crime of a 17-year-old stoned in a public

17     square would have not come to light at all?

18        A.   Well, you know what, it was heard about but on our television, on

19     Serbian television.  It was reported.  I heard about it on several

20     occasions.  I heard Slavisa Kravljaca's statement on our television.

21     What other things were heard, I don't know.  I'm telling you the truth

22     and I'm telling you about what I saw.  And I know what that woman told

23     me, that neighbour of mine who approached me, and two of my Croatian

24     colleagues were present when that was happening.  It was not just me who

25     was there.

Page 30355

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Now I want to move on to the incident that we already

 2     discussed during our meeting between the Green Berets at the Otoka clinic

 3     and the barracks of the JNA.  In paragraph 10 you describe their arrival

 4     and the shooting that followed.

 5             MS. IODICE:  Can I call up 65 ter 24162.

 6        Q.   Mrs. Malinovic, the day before yesterday I showed you this map

 7     and you marked on it the location of the Otoka clinic where you worked

 8     with a circle and a C next to it, and then the bigger circle, the

 9     barracks, with a B next to it.  Do you recognise it -- do you recognise

10     the map?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And you also put an arrow at the location from which the

13     Green Berets were shooting, and that's the arrow that we see on the map;

14     is that right?

15        A.   Yes.  We can see it, not very clearly, though, but yes, we can.

16        Q.   And that's roughly -- and they were shooting roughly from the

17     centre of the clinic, is that right?  That's what, more or less, we see

18     here?

19        A.   Approximately there.  Not from the very centre of the clinic but

20     thereabouts.

21        Q.   And when we talked the other day, you also told me that while the

22     shooting was ongoing, you and your colleagues were hiding out of fear; is

23     that right?

24        A.   Yes, absolutely.

25        Q.   So is it fair to say that you could hear the shooting but you

Page 30356

 1     couldn't really see exactly what was happening?

 2        A.   You know what?  We were on the same floor from which fire was

 3     opened.  Only a corridor separated us and some of them opened fire from

 4     there.  We did hide among the archives, among the shelves with the

 5     patients' files, all of the patients' files.  That's where we hid.  A

 6     Muslim doctor reacted and asked them to stop firing because our lives

 7     were threatened.  I apologise.

 8        Q.   And going back to the map, do you agree with me that the barracks

 9     are on a hill on the south bank of the river?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And the clinic is on the north side of the river and at the same

12     level as the river?

13        A.   Let me put it this way, the Viktor Bubanj was not on a hilltop.

14     It was an elevation, a sloping terrain.  And our clinic was across the

15     road from the Viktor Bubanj barracks, right across the road from there.

16     And the distance was not that great because we could see everything with

17     our naked eye from a window of the building.

18        Q.   Okay.  Let's have a look now at 65 ter 24101, which is the same

19     photo that I already showed you.  Do you see the barracks here?

20        A.   Could you please perhaps -- aha, now I can see that, yes.  It was

21     a bit small and kind of far away, but now I have spotted it.  It's in the

22     corner.  Now I can see it.

23        Q.   And maybe with the assistance of the usher could you mark the

24     barracks.

25        A.   I believe that this is it.  It's a bit blurred, but yes, I'm sure

Page 30357

 1     it is that.  Yes.

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             MS. IODICE:

 4        Q.   If you could please mark it again because I think something went

 5     wrong.

 6        A.   [Marks]

 7        Q.   Thank you.  We can see it now.  And you also see the high-rise

 8     buildings between the barracks and the other bank of the river where the

 9     clinic is; right?  And you're nodding.  I take that's a "yes"?  Thank

10     you.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   So if you could please put the date on the photo and your name.

13     Today's the 15th of November.

14        A.   [Marks]

15             MS. IODICE:  Could we have that admitted into evidence,

16     Your Honours?

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P5993, Your Honours.

19             MS. IODICE:  Thank you.

20        Q.   Let's now look at the barracks from a different angle.

21             MS. IODICE:  Could we have 65 ter 24100.

22        Q.   Do you see the barracks here?

23        A.   Yes, I do.

24        Q.   Do you see the clinic here behind the buildings?

25        A.   It was 20 years ago.  I can't really recognise it, but I think

Page 30358

 1     that it is in the left-hand side corner perhaps.

 2        Q.   Yes.  And --

 3        A.   I apologise, may I add something to what I've already said?  I

 4     believe that half the barracks is missing.  This is not the entire

 5     barracks.  Before the war, the barracks was a much bigger building.  And

 6     there was a military prison there as well.

 7        Q.   That is, in fact, the same shape that we saw on the map; correct?

 8        A.   Yes, I suppose so.  But -- but, we can see the clinic and we can

 9     see how they could have opened fire on the Viktor Bubanj barracks, but

10     what I see in the map, there is a parking-lot because as you see things

11     now, they could not have opened fire on the Viktor Bubanj barracks

12     because of the buildings.  But I know I passed by the Viktor Bubanj

13     barracks a hundred times and this is just one part of it.  And believe me

14     when I say that the rest is now a grassy patch.  There's no barracks

15     there, just grass.

16             MS. IODICE:  Could I have this photo admitted into evidence,

17     Your Honours.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P5994, Your Honours.

20             MS. IODICE:  Thank you.

21        Q.   I want to move on now to your -- to your conclusion at the end of

22     paragraph 10 where you talk about this incident.  And you say:

23             "This is one example of how the members of the Patriotic League

24     and Green Berets used the medical facilities and the buildings in

25     Sarajevo as their firing positions."

Page 30359

 1             You only witnessed this one incident at the Otoka clinic;

 2     correct?

 3        A.   Yes, yes.  But I heard on their radio about the Lake Kosevo

 4     hospital.  They talked about several occasions when JNA soldiers opened

 5     fire on medical institutions.  When I returned in the morning -- I don't

 6     know if I'm speaking too fast.  When I returned from my duty service the

 7     following morning, I switched on Sarajevo TV and I heard on the news that

 8     the JNA launched an attack on my clinic from the Viktor Bubanj barracks.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  I want to move on now to your experience in

10     Nedzarici.  In your statement - and I'm referring to paragraphs 19 and

11     26 - you discuss various issues and say that the Muslim side always

12     provoked the Serb side and your unit was only engaged in defence combat.

13             Now, Nedzarici was quite small; correct?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   You must have seen that Serbs had heavy weapons in Nedzarici;

16     correct?

17        A.   I'm a paramedic.  I didn't know anything about the military.  The

18     only thing I know is that they brought wounded and dead people to my

19     clinic.  And that's all I know.  I know nothing else.

20        Q.   That's right.  You weren't involved in fighting.  You weren't

21     involved in the military.  You weren't involved in any combat action;

22     correct?  Thank you.

23        A.   No, I wasn't.  I worked in the clinic.  I'm a paramedic.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Mrs. Malinovic, do you have a statement with you?

25     Could you take a look at para 19.

Page 30360

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Could you read out the first sentence aloud.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "I claim systematically that all

 4     truces were systematically violated by the Muslim side."

 5             JUDGE KWON:  What do you mean, "all truces were systematically

 6     violated by the Muslim side," what do you know about that or what did you

 7     mean by that?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I meant was that while I was

 9     affiliated with the medical service, if I may be allowed to speak that

10     way, those of us who were on duty on that day, we would have preferred

11     not to have a truce because the biggest number of wounded and dead was

12     during a truce, irrespective of the weather conditions.  Come hell or

13     high water, rain or shine, the biggest number of casualties were in

14     truces.  They opened fire from Dobrinja Pet, from Vojnicko [phoen] Polje,

15     Mojmilo, from behind Alipasino Polje, from the Oslobodjenje building,

16     from the student residential buildings.  There is also a feature called

17     Stupsko Brdo which we referred to as Betonara.  In other words, we were

18     surrounded by snipers.  Even that passage towards Ilidza was under

19     constant sniper fire from Butmir and that was just that one passage that

20     we had in the direction of Ilidza.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Ms. Malinovic.

22             Ms. Iodice, I take it you have more questions for the witness?

23             MS. IODICE:  Just one follow-up question and then one last

24     question.

25        Q.   I just want to follow-up on what Judge Kwon asked you and you

Page 30361

 1     said you didn't see any heavy weapons.  Mile Sladoje, who was the SRK

 2     commander of the Nedzarici barracks, gave a statement to the Defence -

 3     and that was 1D5647 and I'm referring to paragraphs 5 and 6 - and he

 4     stated that there were mortars and a tank in Nedzarici, but you didn't

 5     see those; right?

 6        A.   I don't know that man at all.  I really don't know who you're

 7     talking about.  I didn't even know what the names of the wounded were,

 8     let alone the fighters, the combatants.

 9        Q.   Thank you.

10             MS. IODICE:  And for the last question I would like to move very

11     quickly to private session.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

13                           [Private session]

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 30362

 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                           [Open session]

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, please continue.

16             MS. IODICE:  No further questions, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Well, we passed the time to take a break, but,

18     Mr. Karadzic, if you have any re-examination.

19             THE ACCUSED:  Only one, Excellency, only one.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, please continue.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to call up P993 --

22     P5993.  It is a photo that has already been admitted into evidence.

23                           Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:

24        Q.   [Interpretation] Mrs. Malinovic, please, can you mark the clinic

25     in this photo?  Are there any new things here that didn't exist at the

Page 30363

 1     time?

 2        A.   Could this photo be zoomed in a little?  Can the photo please be

 3     zoomed in a little?

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the central part be zoomed in.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can the photo please be zoomed in.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Is this sufficient?  Just wait till assisted --

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is all right now.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Was that photo taken at the time or is this a photo of a new

11     date, and how do you conclude that?

12        A.   This is a photo of a new date.  This was not taken before the

13     war, before the breakout of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  This is the

14     current appearance of the Viktor Bubanj barracks and the court in

15     Sarajevo.  This is how things are at the moment.  The Viktor Bubanj

16     barracks was a military prison and it wasn't like this.  The facade is

17     different.  This is now a photo depicting the court in Sarajevo.  I

18     really don't know what court that is.  I know it's a court.

19        Q.   How do you know the photo is of a newer date?

20        A.   The facade is new.  I saw it in Sarajevo.

21        Q.   Thank you.  And what about this mosque, is it an old mosque or a

22     mosque that was built recently?

23        A.   This is a very new mosque.  It didn't -- did not exist before.

24        Q.   Thank you.  And the map that you were shown, you don't know what

25     that map depicts, what times?

Page 30364

 1        A.   No, I don't.

 2        Q.   Thank you, Mrs. Malinovic, for having come to testify here.  I

 3     have no further questions.

 4        A.   Thank you, Mr. President.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that concludes your evidence, Mrs. Malinovic.

 7     On behalf of the Chamber, I also would like to thank you for your coming

 8     to The Hague to give it.  Now you are free to go.

 9             We'll rise all together.  We'll have a break for 20 minutes and

10     resume at ten to 11.00.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

12                           [The witness withdrew]

13                           --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.

14                           --- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Although the blinds are drawn at the moment, we are

16     in open session.  Before we bring in the next witness I was about to

17     raise this issue.  Yes, I will do that.  Although we admitted the

18     previous witness's statement and let the evidence go, speaking for

19     myself, I was struggling to understand the relevance of her testimony

20     overall, whether it was not tu quoque at all.

21             So do you have any observation, Mr. Robinson?

22             THE ACCUSED:  I would like to -- I would like to respond,

23     Your Excellency.

24             [Interpretation] We were accused -- I and my army were accused

25     for the fighting around and in Sarajevo.  In the indictment Sarajevo has

Page 30365

 1     been described in one way, from one perspective, and I believe that it is

 2     essential to demonstrate what the situation was like on the other side of

 3     the confrontation line, what forced us, normal people, to defend our

 4     settlements for four years.  It's not to justify this, but to show the

 5     reason for which we fought for four years.  And also the issue is who was

 6     attacking.  Light could be shed on this only by calling people who

 7     suffered those attacks and who responded to those attacks out of

 8     necessity.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I will make it very simple.  I'd like

10     to reiterate two points.  First, it is you, not the Serbian army or Serb

11     people or anybody else, that was indicted in this case.  So what matters

12     is individual responsibility on your part.  Second, who started the

13     attack is not relevant for the purpose of this case at all.  So I was

14     concerned very much about delving into whether the nature of certain

15     combat activities was defensive or offensive.  It's all related

16     jus ad bellum as I indicated yesterday.

17             In the future, the Chamber will keep a closer look as to the

18     relevance of the Defence witnesses' evidence and, if necessary, it may

19     consider not allowing the evidence at all.  But keep that in mind in the

20     future.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could I just add something to my

22     answer?

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As I understand the indictment, I

25     haven't been accused for individual acts, but because of the joint

Page 30366

 1     criminal enterprise, participation or creation of that enterprise, that

 2     includes the conduct of my army in relation to Sarajevo.  So it is

 3     essential to see what was happening on the other side, not in order to

 4     justify anything but, quite simply, because it's not a matter of

 5     individual responsibility.  It is a matter of objective responsibility.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  The Chamber is not arguing with you.  Just bear in

 7     mind what I said to you.

 8                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 9             JUDGE KWON:  If the curtains are drawn we don't need to go to

10     closed -- yes?

11                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, the next witness has protective measures of

13     image distortion.  In order to bring him in, we need to go to closed

14     session very briefly.

15                           [Closed session]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23                           [Open session]

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

25             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, lift the blinds, please.

Page 30367

 1             Good morning, sir.  If you could take the solemn declaration,

 2     please.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Should I stand up?  I solemnly

 4     declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

 5     truth.

 6                           WITNESS:  MILADIN TRIFUNOVIC

 7                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  Please make yourself comfortable.

 9             Mr. Trifunovic, as you may be aware by now that the Chamber has

10     granted the protective measures of image distortion for you, which means

11     that while this trial is broadcast outside, the people outside the

12     courtroom cannot see your face.  You'll be viewed like this.

13             Can you show him the image of his face which has been distorted.

14             Do you understand that, sir?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

17             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

18                           Examination by Mr. Karadzic:

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Trifunovic.

20        A.   Good day.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please see 1D6250.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   While waiting for that to come up, Mr. Trifunovic, did you give

24     the Defence team a statement?

25        A.   Yes, I did.

Page 30368

 1        Q.   Thank you.  I'm waiting for the interpretation.  I'd like to ask

 2     you to wait for the interpretation too and we should speak slowly so that

 3     the interpreters can interpret what we are saying accurately.

 4             Is that the statement that you can see before you on the screen

 5     now?

 6        A.   Yes, it is.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Have you read through the statement and can you

 8     confirm that it accurately reflects what you said?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Did you sign this statement?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Thank you.  If I were to put the same questions to you today

13     viva voce in the courtroom, would the substance of your answers be the

14     same?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Thank you.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, I would like to

18     tender this package pursuant to Rule 92 ter.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Any objections, Ms. Sutherland?

20             MS. SUTHERLAND:  No, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll admit the statement as well as two

22     associated exhibits.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, as Exhibit D2444 through D2446.

24     Thank you.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I will now read out a

Page 30369

 1     summary of Mr. Trifunovic's statement in English.

 2             [In English] Miladin Trifunovic is a professional driver by

 3     occupation.  During the war he held the rank of captain.

 4             After the multi-party elections, the situation in all parts of BH

 5     started changing and becoming more difficult.  Joint ethnic guards were

 6     formed on the Serb initiative before the war in Vogosca to guard housing

 7     and other facilities.  This lasted until groups of the Muslims and Croats

 8     started appearing in the streets carrying linked flags.  To protect

 9     themselves Serbs also started closing ranks, especially since it was

10     common knowledge that the Muslims were arming themselves on a massive

11     scale and forming paramilitary units.  The Patriotic League was formed in

12     Vogosca in mid-June 1991.  In April 1992, after the war had already

13     begun, the Serbian municipality was formed in Vogosca.

14             From March 1992 onwards, with more intensity than ever before,

15     they could hear bursts of small arms fire coming from the Muslim-majority

16     settlements.  In his statement, Miladin Trifunovic recalls a series of

17     incidents where several civilians were tortured, burnt, killed, and

18     beheaded.  On 17th through 18th April 1992, following several previous

19     attempts, Muslim forces raided the Pretis factory, although Serbs managed

20     to regain control over the area.

21             Groups of armed citizens were formed as part of the Vogosca

22     Territorial Defence.  On April 18th, 1992, after Muslim paramilitary

23     units had carried out several armed operations, the Territorial Defence

24     was mobilised and the Vogosca Light Infantry Territorial Brigade was

25     formed.  He was appointed commander since no professional personnel could

Page 30370

 1     be found.  The main road linking Vogosca and other Serbian municipalities

 2     passed through the Pretis factory.  Throughout the entire war, over 1 and

 3     a half kilometres of the road were under permanent sniper fire and many

 4     pedestrians, civilians and passengers in motor vehicles were killed on

 5     these stretches.

 6             On June 8, 1992, Muslim forces mounted a ferocious attack from

 7     the direction of Sarajevo, pushing back Serb forces from Zuc, after which

 8     the zone of responsibility did not change until the end of the war.  As a

 9     result, at this segment of their defence, the balance of power favoured

10     the Muslims many times over.  It should be stressed that Zuc was a

11     dominant point on his unit's entire defence line on that axis.

12             The brigade was manned exclusively by local population.  They had

13     enormous problems with logistics support and difficulties in the

14     supply -- supplied of fuel, artillery rounds, and medical materials.  For

15     food and washing the soldiers relied on their own households, for which

16     the defence had been organised in the first place.

17             The opposing forces were those of the 1st Corps of BH army.

18     Neither his brigade of any of the -- or any of the neighbouring ones were

19     ever carried any offensive activities.  He was never aware of the idea

20     that Sarajevo or parts of Sarajevo not populated by predominantly -- by

21     Serbs should be taken.  Their goal was to defend their villages, houses,

22     properties, and the population that lived there.  The supreme commander's

23     order of June 1992 stated that all-out defence should be launched from

24     the existing surrounding defence lines.  His unit took his -- this order

25     seriously since they were aware of the fact that should their defence

Page 30371

 1     lines be penetrated anywhere in the area surrounding Sarajevo, large

 2     forces would be released from the city and this advantage would seal the

 3     fate of the war.  Thus, the forces of the 1st Corps of BH army

 4     desperately tried to break out of the city.  They launched offensives in

 5     1992, March 1993, and ones that hit Miladin Trifunovic's unit harder,

 6     April and June 1995.

 7             Serb military and civilian authorities surrendered the Sarajevo

 8     airport so that humanitarian aid could be provided through it.  UNPROFOR

 9     convoys frequently passed through his zone of defence transporting

10     humanitarian aid for the population in Sarajevo.  They did not disrupt

11     these convoys in their mission, although it became obvious later on that

12     military equipment for the needs of the BH army had been brought to

13     Sarajevo under the guise of humanitarian aid.

14             Every soldier and officer in his unit was informed of the orders

15     issued by the superior military and civilian authorities, commanding

16     strict adherence to the provisions of the international law of war

17     prohibiting the opening of fire against civilians and civilian

18     facilities.  In any case, in the area facing his unit's line of defence

19     there were no civilian targets that could have been affected.  His unit

20     never launched such bombs, at least while he was its commander.

21             Regarding incident G-17 [sic] when a bomb landed in

22     Dositejeva Street 4a on 16th of June, 1995, Miladin Trifunovic states

23     with full responsibility such bombs were never launched either from the

24     Pretis factory or from any other locations within the brigade's zone of

25     defence.

Page 30372

 1             G-14, maybe I was -- pronounced G-17.  G-14 incident.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   There are a few brief questions that I would like to put to you,

 4     Mr. Trifunovic.  Were you ever arrested by the VRS, the Army of

 5     Republika Srpska?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Could you tell the Chamber when this took place and for what

 8     reason?

 9        A.   On the 15th of December, 1992, because strong Green Beret forces

10     attacked Zuc, and at that point in time, we were not able to drive them

11     back and they drove us back to the hill 830, which was the extreme limit

12     after which they could have entered the inhabited part of Vogosca.  The

13     fighting continued from the 5th of December up until the time I went to

14     prison, and after that too.  Fortunately, we managed to hold them there

15     and they didn't pass through that last hill where we were struggling all

16     the time.  That would be it.

17        Q.   Thank you.  Where were you placed in detention?

18        A.   I spent three days in Ilijas and three days and three nights in

19     the so-called Planja Kuca prison in Semizovac.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Were only Serbs detained in that house or were there

21     any detainees from other ethnic groups?

22        A.   No.  There were members of other ethnic groups in that house and

23     we were there too, me and my four assistants and all the leadership of

24     the Rajlovac Brigade.

25        Q.   Thank you.  How many Serbs were there and how many other people

Page 30373

 1     were there and from which ethnic groups, roughly speaking?

 2        A.   I really don't know what the number is.  I know that there were

 3     four of us.  There was 17 Serbs from Rajlovac, that makes 21; as for the

 4     number of Muslim detainees, I don't know what that number is, nor do I

 5     know the number of Croat detainees.  All I know is they were in the room

 6     adjacent to the one that we were in.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  These Muslims and Croats, were they prisoners of war

 8     or were they civilians?

 9        A.   As far as I know, they were all prisoners of war.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Were there any Muslim and Croat women and children in

11     that detention centre?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   How many floors did that house have?

14        A.   Three floors and there was the ground floor.

15        Q.   Thank you.  As for the rooms in which you were detained, you and

16     the other detainees, were they aired?  Did you have enough air?

17        A.   Yes, the rooms were large ones.  They had large windows.  There

18     was a lot of light.  There was everything that a house needs or that such

19     rooms need.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Given that it was in December, did you have any

21     heating?

22        A.   Yes, we did.

23        Q.   Did you have toilets?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Did you have showers?  Were you able to wash yourselves?

Page 30374

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And you and the other detainees -- well, was -- were any

 3     differences made, any distinctions made, between you and the other

 4     detainees?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  What sort of food did you have?  Did you have a

 7     kitchen that you could use and how did you prepare food?

 8        A.   We prepared food in the Pretis factory canteen for the entire

 9     army, and that food would be distributed to the positions and the food

10     would be brought in certain containers and distributed to the soldiers

11     and me as a detainee at the time.  It would also be distributed to the

12     other prisoners who were there.

13        Q.   I wanted to ask you this:  Was there a kitchen in that house?

14     Was that a residential house?  What kind of a house was that?  What kind

15     of a building?

16        A.   It was a newly built residential house.  There was a room

17     where -- for a kitchen and there was a dining room or a sitting room, if

18     you will.

19        Q.   Did you -- did the detainees suffer physical ill treatment in

20     Planjina Kula while you were there?

21        A.   I did not observe any such thing while I was there.

22        Q.   And a few questions about something that you mentioned.  You said

23     that the Serbian municipality of Vogosca had been set up.  Did you

24     control the entire municipality of Vogosca or actually did the Muslim

25     municipality of Vogosca exist?

Page 30375

 1        A.   No, we did not control the entire municipality of Vogosca.  At

 2     the very beginning, the political leaderships of both the Serbian people

 3     and the Muslim people had agreed and created two Muslims effectively.

 4     The Muslim side was on one side and we were on the other side, obviously.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you didn't ask the witness why he was

 6     arrested, did you?

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I did.  Because they lost Zuc, they

 8     could not maintain the control of Zuc on the 15th of December.  I asked

 9     him and that's what he told me.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Was that --

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- because the Green Berets had

12     mounted an attack on Zuc and they lost it.

13             JUDGE KWON:  So was that the reason for your detention,

14     Mr. Trifunovic?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  That's what was mentioned in

16     my indictment.  That's one of the counts in the indictment.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Are you saying that you were indicted?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I was detained because I had

19     lost a part of the terrain on Zuc.  As the most responsible person in the

20     brigade, I was responsible for that as well.  That's what I was told.

21             JUDGE KWON:  My question is whether you were indicted?  Did you

22     have a trial?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

24             JUDGE KWON:  And you were in detention for six days; that's it?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not on trial.  There was no

Page 30376

 1     indictment.  I just heard the explanation as to why I had been detained.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   As the Serbian territorial guard, later on the Serbian army, did

 6     you control a predominantly Muslim settlement with a predominantly Muslim

 7     population?

 8        A.   By and large, no.  The lines were established very early on.  As

 9     soon as guards were mounted, the lines were also established to indicate

10     what sector belonged to what people, and that's how things persisted

11     until the very end.

12        Q.   Thank you.  You also mentioned in your statement that convoys

13     passed through.  From which direction did they arrive before -- from

14     before they reached your area of responsibility and what was your

15     attitude towards them?  I don't mean you personally but of our army?

16        A.   The convoys passed from Sarajevo towards Zenica and the other way

17     around.  I don't know of any incidents.  They were never stopped or

18     ill-treated.  Their passage was always unobstructed.

19        Q.   What were the orders and instructions from the superior commands

20     and the civilian authorities with regard to those convoys?

21        A.   Every order that we received in that respect was putting a strict

22     ban on ill-treating Red Cross convoy staff or stopping them.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellencies.  At

24     this point in time I have no further questions for this witness.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

Page 30377

 1             Yes, Ms. Sutherland.

 2             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 3             Mr. Registrar [sic], may I have 65 ter 1D12001 on the screen,

 4     please.

 5                           Cross-examination by Ms. Sutherland:

 6        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, as this map comes up on the screen you will see

 7     that it was the map that -- which has a red line on it showing the

 8     Vogosca Brigade's line of defence.  That was apparently marked by you.

 9             Do you recognise that map?

10        A.   Can this be zoomed in a little?  Can this be made more visible?

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can we zoom in to where the red line is, please,

12     in the middle of the map.

13        Q.   Now, is that the map that -- where you drew the red line on?

14        A.   Please bear with me.

15        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, do you recall marking a map with a red line of

16     your line of defence when you spoke with the Defence when you provided

17     your statement?  Is that the --

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   -- map --

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Thank you.  With the usher's help, can you please draw on this

22     map your zone of responsibility.

23             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can bring the map down so that the red

24     line is towards the bottom of the map.

25        Q.   Mark it with the marker pen.

Page 30378

 1             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can we zoom in, please, bring the map down and

 2     zoom in on the red line.  You need to go out a little bit.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Do we need to zoom out --

 4             MS. SUTHERLAND:  We need to zoom out again.

 5             JUDGE KWON: [Microphone not activated]

 6             MS. SUTHERLAND:  The resolution of this map is very poor.

 7        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, we may come back to that.  Can you please

 8     describe what your zone of responsibility was.  What was the depth of

 9     your responsibility?

10        A.   My zone of responsibility, the zone of responsibility of my

11     brigade, was on Zuc hill.  The Gola Brdo elevation across the trigger

12     point 830, across one part of Ugljesici, it passed through -- or across

13     the Vogosca-Sarajevo road.  Partly it went along the Pretis perimeter,

14     along the upper Hotonj towards Poljine, where it linked up with the

15     Kosevo Brigade.  When it comes to that line of responsibility in the

16     direction of Sarajevo, that is, when it comes to the line of defence in

17     depth of our territory behind our lines which faced Breza, it extended

18     from Donja Vogosca.  It went across Ravno Navosce and descended to the

19     Sarajevo-Semizovac-Olovo road.  And it went all the way to Gora and it

20     inter -- crossed the river where it came down to Motka, the Ubare

21     settlement which is up there.  That was the depth of my territory, i.e.,

22     the depth of my zone of responsibility.

23        Q.   You said that you had support forces.  What were your support

24     forces?

25        A.   My support forces consisted of artillery weapons.

Page 30379

 1        Q.   First of all, we'll deal with the infantry.  You had five

 2     battalions, the Semizovac Battalion, Blagovac, Hotonj, Vogosca, and

 3     Krivoglavci; is that right?

 4        A.   Yes, yes.

 5        Q.   So what was the number of infantrymen?

 6        A.   Well, the number varied from 1500 to 1800 and that would be a

 7     total comprising the logistics support and everything that we had.

 8        Q.   Was the military post number for your brigade VP7003?

 9        A.   Yes, it was.

10        Q.   You mentioned artillery.  What artillery did the brigade have?

11     In your statement you say -- you mention 88-millimetre [sic] and

12     120-millimetre mortars.

13        A.   Yes, 80- and 120-millimetre mortars.

14        Q.   How many 88-millimetre -- 82-millimetre [sic] mortars did you

15     have?

16        A.   Every battalion had approximately two such weapons, ten all

17     together.

18        Q.   How many 120-millimetre mortars?

19        A.   While I was a member of the command, four in all.

20        Q.   Where were these artillery positioned?

21        A.   On Blagovac hill and in Krivoglavci.  I'm talking about

22     120-millimetre heavy mortars, whereas the smaller-calibre mortars were

23     deployed in the sectors of their respective battalions.

24        Q.   What were the targets if we are talking generally and I want to

25     know about Sarajevo in particular.  So, first of all, in relation to the

Page 30380

 1     88-millimetre -- 82-millimetre mortars, what were their targets?

 2        A.   We were far from Sarajevo.  We did not target Sarajevo from our

 3     82-millimetre mortars.  There were no targets for us there.

 4        Q.   What were the targets of the 82-millimetre mortars?

 5        A.   Exclusively military targets which appeared on the Muslim side.

 6        Q.   Whereabouts?

 7        A.   Most of them appeared on Zuc hill, and the rest depended on where

 8     the incoming fire came from.

 9        Q.   What about 120-millimetre targets -- mortars, where were their

10     targets?

11        A.   Ninety per cent were aimed towards Zuc hill.

12        Q.   And where were the other 10 per cent aimed?

13        A.   A mortar is a mobile weapon.  It does not stay put and aims at

14     just one target.  120-millimetre mortars were aimed towards Zuc and we

15     often opened -- we were all -- very often targeted but by their artillery

16     below Hum hill and when that happened we defended ourselves.

17        Q.   So if I understand you well, you said that 90 per cent were aimed

18     towards Zuc hill and 10 per cent perhaps towards Hum, but then you also

19     said that they were --

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   -- mobile.  So where did you -- where were they located when they

22     were mobile?  Where did you take them?

23        A.   As I've already told you, a mortar is not mobile.  Its direction,

24     the direction of its target, can be changed.  It can aim for Zuc hill

25     from the same place; it doesn't have to be moved.  Just the barrel is

Page 30381

 1     moved.  New elements are calculated, and when that happens, the mortar

 2     may be aimed at Hum hill, for example.

 3        Q.   I understand.  Besides the 82-millimetre and 122-millimetre

 4     mortars, what other artillery did you have available?

 5        A.   We had a 105-millimetre howitzer and a 122-millimetre howitzer.

 6        Q.   I'm sorry, I just need to go back to the military post number.  I

 7     think I said VP 7003.  I meant to say -- and you agreed with me, I think.

 8     Isn't it VP 7033?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Could you repeat your number, Ms. Sutherland.

10             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes.

11        Q.   Earlier, a few minutes ago I said that the military post number

12     for your brigade was VP 7003 and you agreed with me, but it's, in fact,

13     VP 7033, is it not?

14        A.   Yes, yes.

15        Q.   I'd now like to look at a few documents.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we could have 65 ter number 01224A on the

17     screen, please.  If we could go to page 8 in e-court.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Has it been released, Ms. Sutherland?

19             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I will just check, Your Honour.

20             It's been done now.

21             JUDGE KWON:  1224A?

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour.

23                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

24             JUDGE KWON:  All it says is it equals to D1202 -- we'll see.

25             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I really am struggling with numbers this

Page 30382

 1     morning.  It's 12204.  My apologies.  If we can go to page 8.  I'm sorry,

 2     in mine it's page 8 -- but if we can go to -- it's a very short document,

 3     it's only four pages.  If we can flip through to the one dated the

 4     23rd of September, please.  If we can go back a previous page.  And

 5     again.  To the 23rd of September.  Thank you.

 6        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, you see there that there is a request for pieces

 7     of -- 20 pieces of 120-millimetre LTF mortar shells and 30 pieces of

 8     105-millimetre howitzer shells.  And you mentioned a moment ago the

 9     105-millimetres.  Whereabouts were they positioned and what were their

10     targets?

11        A.   This is not a request issued by my brigade.  This is a request by

12     the Igman Brigade.

13        Q.   Actually it's the Hadzici Brigade.  I'm looking for the Vogosca

14     Brigade.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Hadzici Battalion.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Is this 12204A?

17        Q.   In any event, Mr. Trifunovic, can you tell me where your

18     105-millimetre howitzer shells were positioned and what their targets

19     were?

20        A.   Both 105- and 120-millimetre howitzers were on a hilltop above

21     Blagovac and their targets were the same as our mortar targets.  Very

22     often we did not have enough shells either for the mortars or for the

23     howitzers and that's why we overcame that difficulty.  We had to defend

24     ourselves and when we did that we used either or.

25        Q.   What about --

Page 30383

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. Sutherland, let's be clear with the document.

 2     The document we saw earlier on was a -- on page 6 of 65 ter 12204 and

 3     what we see now is 12204A.

 4             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour --

 5             JUDGE KWON:  But dated --

 6             MS. SUTHERLAND:  -- 23rd of September.  When I called up the

 7     number originally I said the wrong exhibit number and I said it with an

 8     A, but when it was called up again the exhibit without the A came up so

 9     the big document, in fact, came up.

10             JUDGE KWON:  But the number with A shows the date of 21st --

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  This --

12             JUDGE KWON:  -- does it not?

13             MS. SUTHERLAND:  There's eight pages in the range.  The page I

14     wanted was on page 7 of the English and page 7 of the B/C/S.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  We have it now, yes.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Thank you, Your Honour.

17        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, we can see there the document in front of us is

18     the 23rd of September where you have requested to be provided with

19     32 pieces of 122-millimetre TFG SP shell.  Is that a self-propelled

20     shell?

21        A.   I don't understand what kind of weapon you're talking about.

22        Q.   You see here the first one, 122-millimetre TFG SP shell.  Does

23     the "SP" stand for self-propelled?

24        A.   This is a round.  No, a howitzer is located in one position.  It

25     cannot be self-propelled and it's not easily movable, it's not easily

Page 30384

 1     mobile, and its rounds were manufactured by the Pretis factory.  It is

 2     fired in a regular fashion.  It is certainly not self-propelled.  It

 3     cannot be self-propelled.  This "SP" stands for the markings of the

 4     factory.  I'm not an artillery guy.  I don't know much about this, but I

 5     know that this cannot be self-propelled.  I know that the rounds were

 6     produced by the Pretis factory and I really don't know what else to tell

 7     you.

 8        Q.   Can you tell me where -- you said that they were quite -- they're

 9     not easily movable.  Where were these -- first of all, how many of these

10     mortars did your brigade have, 122-millimetres howitzers?

11        A.   At the beginning I said that we had one howitzer while I was

12     commander.  It was a 120-millimetre howitzer and we had a 105-millimetre

13     howitzer as well.

14        Q.   Right.  But we can see here that you've just ordered 32 shells

15     for 122-millimetre howitzer.  So your brigade must have had at least one.

16     So my question is:  How many did your brigade have?

17        A.   I believe that I was clear.  In 1992 there was just one howitzer

18     of that calibre and another one, one 105-millimetre howitzer.  That's

19     what my brigade had.

20        Q.   So why in your statement did you say that you only had -- your

21     brigade only had 82-millimetre and 105 -- 120-millimetre mortars, when we

22     can see here that - and you've just said - that you had 122-millimetre

23     howitzer and 105-millimetre howitzer?

24        A.   Well, that's what I said that we had.

25             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we could go to page 1 of this document -- oh,

Page 30385

 1     sorry, not page 1, page 5.

 2        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, we see here the very next -- or two days later,

 3     three days later, you're requesting another 80 pieces of 105-millimetre

 4     TGF shell, 80 pieces of 120-millimetres, and 21 pieces of

 5     122-millimetres.  And if we can go to page 6, it shows that you got

 6     exactly what you asked for.  And it was received by Aleksa Jokic, is that

 7     right, at the Blagojevic [sic] Brigade -- it states "brigade," but in

 8     fact Blagojevic was a battalion, wasn't it?

 9        A.   The Blagojevic Battalion, yes.  But as I said, the artillery was

10     located in the area of responsibility of the Blagojevic Battalion on the

11     hill, and that is why it was delivered to them, up there.

12             MS. SUTHERLAND:  And if we can just quickly go to page 8 of this

13     document - I meant to do it a moment ago -- page 9, I'm sorry -- oh, 8.

14        Q.   Yes, that shows -- that's going back to -- the document we just

15     looked at on the 23rd of September, and that shows that again you got

16     exactly what you asked for on the 23rd of September, doesn't it?

17        A.   Yes.

18             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can go to page 3 in e-court, and this is

19     just another request on the 24th of September for a hundred pieces of

20     122-millimetre mortars.  And if we go to the next page, page 4, it shows

21     that that was dispatched on that date.

22        Q.   Is that right?

23        A.   Well, probably.

24        Q.   And if we go to page 1, and this is dated the 21st of September,

25     from the 3rd Hotonj Battalion, and that's within the Vogosca Brigade, is

Page 30386

 1     it not, requesting a hundred pieces of 122-millimetre [sic] mortar shells

 2     because they've reached a critical minimum "because we have participated

 3     in operations to mop-up Zuc."

 4             You agreed with me earlier that Hotonj Battalion was in the

 5     Vogosca Brigade?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   But if you'd mopped up Zuc on the 21st of September, which this

 8     document says, what was the need in the four-day period between the

 9     23rd and the 26th of September for requesting 513 pieces of howitzer

10     shells and mortar shells for two battalions?

11        A.   Well, I don't know what you mean, "mopped-up Zuc."  We didn't

12     mop-up Zuc throughout the war time-period.  Zuc is a plateau.  It's a

13     very wide area and there was fighting there all the time throughout the

14     war.  And from Sarajevo there were forceful forces from the Muslim army

15     coming in our direction; they were stronger than our forces.  All we had

16     was the protection that these sort of artillery pieces provided us with.

17     They drove us back to trig point 830 in spite of that, as I said at the

18     beginning.

19        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, they're not my words, they're your battalion's

20     words, "mopping-up."  But again, you still haven't answered the question.

21     Where were your 122-millimetre howitzers positioned?

22        A.   Well, do we understand each other or not?  I said that we had in

23     1992, while I was the brigade commander, one 120-millimetre howitzer on a

24     hill, on Blagovac, and we used that howitzer from that position.

25        Q.   I'm sorry, you haven't told me what the targets were for that

Page 30387

 1     howitzer.

 2        A.   I'll repeat what I said.  The exclusive targets were the Zuc

 3     plateau; that was the exclusive target.  I said that a while ago and I'll

 4     repeat that.  The Vogosca Brigade focused on the Zuc plateau practically

 5     throughout the war-time period.

 6        Q.   Okay.  You're saying that you don't have any targets in Sarajevo

 7     proper; correct?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   You agree that 122-millimetre howitzer is a large, sophisticated,

10     expensive weapon; yes?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And it has a maximum range of up to 15 kilometres, doesn't it?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   It's quite good for blowing up buildings, isn't it?

15        A.   No.  This artillery piece can be used to attack trenches,

16     fortified bunkers, and so on and so forth.  It can't destroy a building.

17     Perhaps it can fire on a building, but as for blowing it up, that's out

18     of the question.

19        Q.   How far is Vogosca from the city?

20        A.   About 15 kilometres.  It depends where you measure the distance

21     from, from which part of the city.

22        Q.   To the centre.

23        A.   Perhaps up to 20 kilometres.

24        Q.   Twenty kilometres from Vogosca to the centre of Sarajevo?  Isn't

25     it more 5 to 7?

Page 30388

 1        A.   No.  No.

 2             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Could we have Exhibit P00836 on the screen,

 3     please.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  If it is okay, shall we take a break now?

 5             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Well, Your Honour, if I can just deal --

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 7             MS. SUTHERLAND:  -- with this document and then we can take the

 8     break.

 9        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, you see here this is an order from

10     Dragomir Milosevic dated the 15th of July, 1993, and it's sent to all

11     units in brigade regiments and specifically makes mention of the

12     Vogosca Tactical Group.  And it says:

13             "All units are forbidden to fire on Sarajevo proper, unless

14     defending VRS positions."

15             So my question is:  Why would there be a need to send this order

16     to the Vogosca Brigade if it wasn't either firing on Sarajevo proper or

17     if it didn't have the capacity to do so?

18        A.   Well, first of all, this order is from 1993.  I wasn't a

19     commander at the time.  But a larger army formation such as a corps, when

20     it sends an order, if it's of a general nature, it sends that order to

21     all the units within its corps.  This only concerns prohibition on using

22     artillery ammunition to fire on the town.  It includes those who can act

23     in such a way and those who can't.  So these things are sent out to

24     everyone.

25        Q.   You mentioned the date was in 1993, when you were -- when you

Page 30389

 1     weren't the commander of the Vogosca Brigade.  But you were still within

 2     the Vogosca Brigade because you were commander of the Blagojevic

 3     Battalion, were you not?

 4        A.   Yes, I was the commander of the Blagovac Battalion, but when I

 5     take a different, lower position, I don't receive such orders from the

 6     corps, I receive them from the brigade commander, and this was probably

 7     sent to them.

 8             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, that would be a good time for a

 9     break.

10             JUDGE KWON:  We'll have a break for half an hour and resume at

11     12.33.

12                           --- Recess taken at 12.03 p.m.

13                           --- On resuming at 12.35 p.m.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Please continue, Ms. Sutherland.

15             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Thank you, Your Honour.

16             May I ask for Exhibit -- 65 ter 12204A to be admitted, please.

17     That was the list of four pages within the exhibit.

18             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President, we would have no objection to

19     those pages which were used during the examination being admitted.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, but I was wondering whether we saw only

21     four pages?

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I went to the first exhibit number that I called

23     out and then I realised that it wasn't the correct exhibit and we went to

24     the correct exhibit.  So that's the document that I seek to tender.  But

25     I will be going back to that other bigger document shortly.

Page 30390

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 2             Yes, we'll admit those pages we've dealt with.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P5995, Your Honours.

 4             MS. SUTHERLAND:

 5        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, you said in your statement that neither your

 6     brigade, i.e., the Vogosca Brigade, nor any of the neighbouring ones ever

 7     carried out any offensive operations.  We'll leave aside your

 8     neighbouring brigades, but that's not true, is it?

 9        A.   What do you mean?

10        Q.   Okay.

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Let's have a look at 65 ter number 24072.

12        Q.   I mean that you actually ordered and carried out offensive

13     activities; do you agree?  Mr. Trifunovic, can you just answer the

14     question that I put to you before you look at that document.

15        A.   Could you repeat the question.

16        Q.   It's right, isn't it, that you ordered and carried out offensive

17     activities, contrary to what you state in your statement?

18        A.   I can't answer the question before reading this to see what it's

19     about.  We were engaged in offensive --

20        Q.   Sorry --

21        A.   -- action on the hill of Zuc exclusively.

22        Q.   -- I'll interrupt you there, Mr. Trifunovic.

23             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If the Registrar can take the document off the

24     screen.

25        Q.   It's a simple question.  Do you agree that you participated in

Page 30391

 1     and, in fact, ordered offensive operations, yes or no?

 2        A.   Partially, yes, but it depends on the area concerned.  If we're

 3     talking about the area of Zuc, then yes.  In certain situations it was

 4     necessary to improve the position.  If we came under sniper fire, so then

 5     yes.  But as for attacking the depth of Sarajevo and so on and so forth,

 6     in that case my answer is no.

 7        Q.   But -- so why did you put in your statement that neither you or

 8     the other neighbouring brigades ever carried out any offensive

 9     activities, when you've just said that you did?

10        A.   Offensive operations on the plateau of Zuc.  This isn't

11     considered as offensive action because the Zuc plateau was inhabited

12     exclusively by Serbs, and all the combatants up there, most of them,

13     wanted to go to their homes to approach their graves.  That's the

14     problem.  So I don't consider that to be offensive action.  This is no

15     more than a matter of taking back territory that we lost.

16        Q.   Well, that's your -- one interpretation, Mr. Trifunovic.

17             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can have the document back on the screen,

18     65 ter 24072.

19        Q.   This is dated the 6th of October, 1992, and it's an order for

20     attack which is actually signed on your behalf as commander of the

21     Vogosca Brigade.

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can go to page 2 and page 3 in the

23     B/C/S -- and page 3 in the English, sorry.

24        Q.   Who signed this order on your behalf?  Is this Mr. Kenic your

25     deputy of the -- who was deputy of the Vogosca Light Infantry Brigade?

Page 30392

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And if we go back to page 1, this is about an attack on Orlic, is

 3     it not?  And the attack is scheduled for the 7th of October.  Isn't this

 4     an order for an attack, an offensive action?

 5        A.   The hill of Orlic, trig point 877, is in the wider area of the

 6     Zuc plateau.  It dominates all the other trig points that we have already

 7     mentioned in the area of Zuc.  The Orlic hill and below consisted of

 8     Serbian territory.  Up until the 8th of June, 1992, that territory was

 9     under the control of the VRS, the Army of Republika Srpska.  But on the

10     8th of June, when the Muslim forces launched an attack, they drove us

11     back from trig point 877 as far as trig point 850.  So as I have said,

12     this is no more than a matter of taking back territory that we had

13     previously lost.

14        Q.   Yes, but it's an offensive action, is it not?

15        A.   No, it's not an offensive operation.  If you try to return your

16     territory, to get back to your homes, this is what people strove for.

17     The houses of all these people were in the vicinity of trig point 877,

18     near the Orlic hill and below.  And the wider area of that plateau isn't

19     densely inhabited.

20             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, may this document be admitted,

21     please?

22             MR. ROBINSON:  No objection, Mr. President.

23             JUDGE KWON:  But I have to express concern about this debate or

24     issue of whether certain operation was of defensive nature or offensive

25     nature.  It leads us nowhere.  Bear that in mind -- both parties should

Page 30393

 1     bear that in mind.

 2             We'll admit this.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P5996, Your Honours.

 4             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If I could have 65 ter number 24166 on the

 5     screen, please.

 6        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, we can see here this is a report dated the

 7     13th of October, 1992.  It's from the Vogosca Brigade command, which is

 8     you, to the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps OG 1, and you're reporting on the

 9     conditions and combat operations in the zone of responsibility for the

10     brigade.  It says here:

11             "In the following period we are planning the take-over of the Zuc

12     line ..." and mentions the trig points and cleansing of the villages

13     Ugorsko, Menjak and Barica.  Who lived in those villages, Ugorsko,

14     Menjak, and Barica?

15        A.   Ugorsko, Menjak, and Barica were inhabited by Muslims.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, can this document be admitted?

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P5997, Your Honours.

19             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can we just quickly go back to exhibit --

20     65 ter number 12204.

21        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, this is quite a number of documents, individual

22     documents, requests from and dispatches to battalions within the

23     Vogosca Operative Group, that is, Vogosca, Rajlovac, Ilijas, and there's

24     also dispatches from Hadzici, Ilidza, Lukavac, Blazuj, and Nedzarici.

25     I'm interested in taking you to one in relation to your brigade and

Page 30394

 1     that's on page 7 -- page 3.  It's for the 17th of October, 1992.

 2             MS. SUTHERLAND:  And can we have the same page in English,

 3     please.

 4        Q.   We see here this is a huge variety -- in fact, ten different

 5     types of weapons and almost 2.000 artillery weapons dispatched to

 6     Aco Jokic from your brigade.  And it includes 155-millimetre guns M1

 7     howitzer, 105-millimetre howitzer M56, 76-millimetre mountain gun B1,

 8     76-millimetre gun ZiS, and 122-millimetre howitzer Gvozdika.

 9             What did you need, on the 17th of October, almost 2.000 artillery

10     weapons for?  Is this in relation to the planned take-over of the Zuc

11     line that we saw back in Exhibit P5997?

12             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. Sutherland, we are talking of shells, not the

13     weapons themselves; correct?

14             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, artillery weapons.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What was the question?

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:

17        Q.   What was the need for almost 2.000 artillery weapons [sic] on the

18     17th of October?

19             And I said was this in relation to the planning that we saw in

20     Exhibit P5997 a moment ago in relation to the planning of the take-over

21     of Zuc.

22        A.   The ammunition that we needed -- in the territory of Vogosca

23     there was the Vogosca Tactical Group which was composed of three

24     brigades:  The Kosevo Brigade, the Vogosca Brigade, and the Rajlovac

25     Brigade.  What was issued was issued through the Vogosca Brigade in order

Page 30395

 1     to be distributed among all the other brigades.  The tactical brigade

 2     Vogosca had been established and deployed.

 3        Q.   And if we can quickly go to page 2, it shows on the

 4     22nd of October again five different types of weapons and over a hundred

 5     pieces dispatched to the Vogosca Brigade.  And if we go to page 1 --

 6     sorry, that was on the 22nd of October.  And if we go to page 1 deals

 7     with the 23rd of October, 1992, six different types of weapons and

 8     450 pieces dispatched.  Do you see that there, sir?

 9        A.   Yes, I do.  But I have told you that Vogosca was the centre from

10     which things were distributed amongst the other brigades, the

11     Kosevo Brigade and the Rajlovac Brigade which were issued with weapons,

12     equipment, ammunition, from the depot.  And that quantity was issued for

13     all the three brigades, i.e., for the entire tactical group.

14        Q.   You mentioned in your statement, and this is -- you note that the

15     Muslims had many more soldiers than the Serbs.  But it's a fact, isn't

16     it, that the VRS - and in this case the SRK - had superior weaponry to

17     the opposing forces?

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I must assist with the

19     interpretation.  Madam Sutherland used the word "soldiers" which was

20     interpreted as "troops" -- or rather, Madam Sutherland said "weapons" and

21     it was interpreted as "troops."  The transcript reads well and it is a

22     good reflection of what Madam Sutherland said, but the Serbian

23     interpretation was wrong.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Did you understand the question, Mr. Trifunovic?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understood the question but I'm

Page 30396

 1     waiting to see what's next.  When it comes to the manpower and the

 2     numerical strength, i.e., armed and equipped soldiers, their strength was

 3     three or four times superior to ours.  There is a report from a brigade

 4     commander who was on the opposition side.

 5             MS. SUTHERLAND:

 6        Q.   My question was -- I noted that you said that there were -- that

 7     the Muslims had more soldiers than the Serbs, but it's a fact, isn't it,

 8     that the VRS had the superior weaponry?

 9        A.   That's correct.  I don't know what they had.  I know what we had.

10     I really can't say what they had.  I wasn't there.  Luckily enough, I

11     wasn't.

12             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, if I may just go back to -- you

13     asked me a question a moment ago:  "Ms. Sutherland, are we talking of

14     shells not the weapons themselves; correct?"  And I said:  "Yes,

15     artillery weapons."  In fact I misspoke and I did mean shells.  You were

16     right.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  I'm a bit confused.  You said what

18     Ms. Sutherland stated was correct.  What did you mean?  You agree that

19     Serbs had superior weaponry?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if they had superior

21     weaponry.  It's just my estimate.  They may have had superior weaponry.

22     I don't know.  I don't know what they had.  I only know what we had.

23             MS. SUTHERLAND:

24        Q.   Well, you know what they had in relation -- I'll move on.

25             I want to move on to another topic now.  You completed officers

Page 30397

 1     school in 1976, didn't you, and you were discharged with the rank of

 2     captain?

 3        A.   I completed the officers school in Bileca and I obtained the rank

 4     of second lieutenant.  As a member of the reserve that existed in the

 5     former Yugoslavia, I was promoted all the way to the rank of a captain.

 6             MS. SUTHERLAND:  And, Your Honour, before I forget, may I tender

 7     the pages of exhibit 12204 into evidence.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  We dealt with two pages or three pages?

 9             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Three.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

11                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

12             MS. SUTHERLAND:

13        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, as an officer, a captain, and a commanding

14     officer at the brigade level you're familiar with the regulations

15     relating to the use of detained persons, either civilians or prisoners of

16     war in relation to work, aren't you?

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, exhibit number shall be

18     Exhibit P5998.  Thank you.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

20             MS. SUTHERLAND:

21        Q.   I want to show you a series of documents now.

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we could have 65 ter number 24081 on the

23     screen, please.

24        Q.   This is an order dated the 18th of October, 1992, signed by you,

25     for 30 detainees to be used on Zuc on the 19th of October for

Page 30398

 1     construction work.  And there's a reference in the predicate paragraph to

 2     item 10 of the Instruction on the Treatment of Prisoners.  That's number

 3     21-26/92 of the 13th of June, 1992.  I also see that you copied the

 4     prison warden and the War Commission.  What type of construction work did

 5     the detainees perform when they were taken to Zuc?

 6        A.   They mostly fortified the lines, things like that, nothing

 7     special.

 8        Q.   What do you mean by "fortifying the lines"?  Can you just explain

 9     that in layman terms.

10        A.   So far I've stated that there was ongoing combat on Zuc hill.

11     Throughout the war there was always combat going on.  We moved the line

12     to and fro all the time.  We did not have the time to fortify our lines.

13     That's why we used our own forces and additional forces in order to

14     fortify those lines because we did not have either the time or the

15     opportunity to do that properly, given the activities and the incoming

16     fire from Sarajevo.

17             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can that document be admitted, please.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P5999, Your Honours.

20             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can we have Exhibit P02385.

21        Q.   This is a document dated the 17th of September, 1992, number 11

22     of 84 [sic] and it's signed by you as commander of the Vogosca command.

23     And you request 50 prisoners for work in the field on the 18th of

24     September, 1992.  What type of work did detainees usually perform in the

25     field?

Page 30399

 1        A.   This is again on Zuc hill.

 2             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can I just have a moment, Your Honour?

 3                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 4             MS. SUTHERLAND:

 5        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, the Court has heard evidence before it from

 6     Witness Eset Muracevic in relation to this particular request that 50 men

 7     were taken from Planjo's house and used as human shields to move the

 8     front line and that some were killed and a number wounded, and that the

 9     wounded told the other detainees when they returned that they were used

10     as human shields.

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I refer the Trial Chamber and the accused to

12     Exhibit P02361, page 26, item number 34 and paragraphs 69 to 83.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Which was admitted pursuant to 92 bis?

14             MS. SUTHERLAND:  92 ter, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Could you spell the witness name again.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  M-u-r-a-c-e-v-i-c.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Eset Muracevic.

18             Yes, please continue.

19             MS. SUTHERLAND:  May that document be admitted?

20             JUDGE KWON:  I said Eset, instead of Esad.

21             Yes, this will be -- that's already in evidence, isn't it?

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  Yes.  Can I have

23     Exhibit P01144, please.

24             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President, I don't think the

25     witness was given the benefit to answer any question concerning this

Page 30400

 1     document.  Can we hear from the witness --

 2             JUDGE KWON:  That's correct --

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND:  He did.  I asked him -- I said what type of work

 4     did detainees usually perform in the field and he said this was at Zuc.

 5             JUDGE BAIRD:  Was that the last question, Ms. Sutherland, you

 6     asked?

 7             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes.  He said:  "This is again on Zuc hill."  So

 8     I was taking that he was meaning fortified positions.  But we can ask the

 9     witness to confirm that the work on Zuc was again as he had previously

10     said, fortifying the positions and moving the front line.

11        Q.   Is that right?

12        A.   I said fortifying the positions and accessing the positions.

13     Fortifying the accesses to those positions which led to Zuc hill where we

14     were chased away to a different trig point.  We did not have enough

15     trenches or at least -- or rather, we did not have any trenches at all

16     through which we could access the hill.

17             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If I could have Exhibit P01144, please.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And, Your Excellencies, what about

19     the comment proffered about Muracevic?  No questions were asked.  The

20     witness didn't say anything about people being taken away as human

21     shields.  It appeared to be nothing less than testimony on behalf of the

22     Prosecution.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Fair enough.

24             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour --

25             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, you can put that to the witness.

Page 30401

 1             MS. SUTHERLAND:  The witness -- the witness said that they were

 2     taken to Zuc, that they were used for fortifying and moving the front

 3     line.  I was simply --

 4             JUDGE KWON:  No, you reminded of some content of

 5     Witness Muracevic and you didn't put that to the witness.  I think it's

 6     fair to put it to the witness.

 7             MS. SUTHERLAND:

 8        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, would you like to comment on Mr. Muracevic's

 9     evidence that I just summarised for you in relation to that request for

10     50 men?

11        A.   I don't know what Mr. Muracevic said, but I claim with full

12     responsibility that they were never used for that purpose, the purpose

13     that he mentioned.  Both we and ourselves [as interpreted] were used for

14     one and only purpose and that was improving access trenches to the line,

15     fortifying --

16             THE ACCUSED:  "Both we and ourselves."  Both them and ourselves.

17     [No interpretation].

18             JUDGE KWON:  You are overlapping again.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Both them and ourselves were used

20     and they were never used without us and they were only used for improving

21     accesses to the lines and for fortifying the lines.

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:

23        Q.   Yes, and that's exactly what you said on page 68 when I said:

24     "What do you mean by fortifying the lines?  Can you explain it in layman

25     terms?"  You said:  "We moved the line to and fro all the time.  We did

Page 30402

 1     not have the time to fortify our lines.  That's why we used our own

 2     forces and additional forces ..." - and by "additional forces," do you

 3     mean the detainees from Planjo's house? - "in order to fortify the lines

 4     because we did not have either the time nor the opportunity to do that

 5     properly, given the activities and incoming fire from Sarajevo."

 6             So, first of all, when you said back on page 68 "additional

 7     forces," you were referring to the document we had just been discussing,

 8     the detainees from Planjo's, were you not?

 9        A.   I said that we together with them, we took them with us.  And let

10     me explain, on that day, the 17th or the 18th, I was wounded before that

11     even started.  So we could not use them as the living shields because on

12     that day we had 11 casualties among our soldiers, 11 dead.  As soon as we

13     started fortifying the line, the Muslim forces must have noticed us --

14        Q.   If I could stop you there.  If I could stop you there, we'll get

15     to when you were injured in a little while, Mr. Trifunovic.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, I think that that satisfies --

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we can move on.  Thank you.

18             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Now if we can look at P01144.  This is on the

19     screen now.  It's dated the 19th of September, 1992.  It's a bulletin for

20     the 18th of September, 1992, for reporting on the deaths and wounding of

21     detainees who were taken to Zuc hill.  The report makes a specific

22     reference to your request 11/84.  And this report, is it signed by

23     Branko Vlaco's deputy, Nebojsa Spiric.

24        A.   Probably.

25        Q.   So in relation to work performed in the field, this

Page 30403

 1     Trial Chamber's also heard evidence before it in relation to Witness

 2     Bego Selimovic, whose relative is listed in P01144, who was used as a

 3     human shield on the 18th of September, when he died.  And on the 19th or

 4     the 20th of September, 1992, the witness was selected to go to Zuc to

 5     look for his body.  And when he was there, he had to carry with another

 6     detainee the body of a dead man up to the command while being beaten with

 7     a piece of wood.  And he was later then made to carry ammunition and

 8     water.

 9             MS. SUTHERLAND:  And I refer the Trial Chamber and the accused to

10     Exhibit P0046, paragraph numbers 28 and 29, but also generally through

11     paragraphs 26 to 38, and also Exhibit P00045.

12        Q.   Do you have any comment to make in relation to that summary of

13     evidence, Mr. Trifunovic?

14             JUDGE KWON:  Can we deal with one by one.  Can you confirm with

15     this document first and then go on with your next question.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:

17        Q.   This document is a bulletin, is it not, setting out who were

18     killed and who were wounded the day that they were taken to Zuc pursuant

19     to your request; is that right?

20        A.   I repeat, on that day, on the 18th of September, as soon as we --

21        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, I'll stop --

22        A.   -- arrived on Zuc --

23        Q.   -- you there.  My question was simply:  Can you confirm what this

24     document is about, as I just put to you, that it's a document, a

25     bulletin, by the -- signed on behalf of the warden of the prison setting

Page 30404

 1     out who was killed and who was wounded in relation to a request by you to

 2     take them to Zuc for work in the field?

 3        A.   You do not allow me to express myself.  As soon as we got on Zuc

 4     on the 18th of September, I was wounded and taken away --

 5        Q.   Stop you there --

 6        A.   -- to the hospital and --

 7        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, I will stop you there.  My question was simply:

 8     Do you agree that that's what the document says?  You've already said the

 9     circumstances about your wounding; I'm not interested in that for the

10     moment.  Is what I put to you what the document states?

11             JUDGE KWON:  No, we can read what is there.

12             But, Mr. Trifunovic, irrespective of how many Serb soldiers were

13     wounded or killed, do you confirm that four prisoners were killed and

14     seven prisoners were wounded due to the field work in Zuc?  Do you agree

15     with that or not?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree that people did get killed,

17     but I don't know how many, before -- because I had been taken to

18     hospital.  So I wouldn't know how many died, how many were killed.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Now you see this report.  You would not question the

20     veracity of this document, would you?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure whether it is true or

22     not.  I wasn't there.  I can't tell you.  I don't know.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

24             Yes, please continue, Ms. Sutherland.

25             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Well, I would seek to have the document

Page 30405

 1     admitted, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  I think it's already in evidence.

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, it is.

 4        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, the Trial Chamber has also heard evidence before

 5     it in relation -- has evidence before it in relation to Witness

 6     Mustafa Fazlic who was -- describes being used as a human shield on the

 7     17th or the 18th of September when 50 detainees were taken to Zuc.  He

 8     describes being made to walk with 20 of the men in a long line in front

 9     of the soldiers at the time they started shelling the position they were

10     about to attack.  That is, the Serbs.  They had to look for mines in

11     front of them while the soldiers were shooting from behind the detainees'

12     backs.  His brother, who was next to him, was shot.  He was also made to

13     go and get ammunition.  And he mentions the names of two of the persons

14     who are listed in the bulletin we just saw, P01144.

15             MS. SUTHERLAND:  And I refer the Trial Chamber and the accused to

16     P00042, pages 4 to 6.

17             Again, do you have any comment to make on the summary I just

18     read?  Is this the type of work that you were having the detainees do on

19     Zuc?

20        A.   No.  I can claim with full responsibility that no one used them

21     for such purposes, but only in order to fortify the lines.

22        Q.   You said a moment ago, back on, I think, page 68, that you used

23     them to move the lines.  I will move on.

24             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can I have exhibit --

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, no, no.  We didn't.  That's

Page 30406

 1     not what was said.  What was said is that we were continually moving the

 2     line back.  The Muslim forces were driving us back and, as a result, we

 3     had to withdraw.  We weren't moving the line forward.  There's a

 4     difference.

 5             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Could I have Exhibit P2387, please.

 6        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, this is dated the 22nd of September, 1992.  It's

 7     a bulletin for the 21st of September, 1992, from prison warden

 8     Brano Vlaco -- Branko Vlaco reporting on there being eight detainees

 9     wounded and two detainees killed at Zuc, making specific reference to

10     your request dated 11/74 of the 17th of September, 1992.  And again it's

11     signed by his deputy, Nebojsa Spiric.

12             The Trial Chamber has heard evidence that detainees that were

13     taken out were forced to carry out various jobs mainly on the front

14     lines, including the digging of trenches, communication trenches, and

15     other fortification features as well as carrying of ammunition and heavy

16     weaponry.  And that such jobs carried out on the front lines actually

17     took part along the lines of separation between the Serbian army and the

18     Bosnian army where the majority of detainees were exposed to fire from

19     both sides.  And this is Mr. Muracevic's testimony at transcript pages

20     12653 to 12654.

21             Do you have any comment to make on the summary of evidence that

22     I've just read?

23        A.   Well, yes.  There was no need for them to dig in front of our

24     front line.  They were never alone without us nor did they ever go in

25     front of us in order to dig.  Why?  We weren't defending there, so we

Page 30407

 1     were all there together, we were working, the VRS was with them, the Army

 2     of Republika Srpska.  So there was never a need to use them for such

 3     purposes.

 4        Q.   So when the Bosnian Serb army were walking along, where were the

 5     detainees?

 6        A.   What do you mean?  When they were walking along?  Where?  That is

 7     a plateau, a hill.  You can't walk around.  You have to stay underground.

 8     You can't just walk around.

 9             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If I could have 65 ter number 24082 on the

10     screen, please.

11        Q.   This is an order dated the 22nd of September, 1992, from you to

12     the prison to provide 30 prisoners for, again, construction work at the

13     Zuc location.  And again you reference Article 10 of the Instruction on

14     the Treatment of Prisoners.  And you've copied it to the War Commission.

15     And this order states that it comes into effect on the 26th of September,

16     1992, and remains in effect for as long as necessary.

17             So, again, you agree that this is an order for more construction

18     work for an indefinite period, yes?

19        A.   No, not for an indefinite period.  This was according to the

20     needs because action was daily.  So the issue on that day was whether we

21     would lose or not, whether the Muslims would enter Vogosca or not.  So we

22     asked everyone who could, even women, to go up there to fortify the lines

23     and to prevent the Muslims from penetrating the lines.

24        Q.   Which women are you talking about?  Where from?

25        A.   Women of Serbian ethnicity who were among the ranks of the

Page 30408

 1     troops, who were working in the canteens, who were from logistics sector

 2     and so on and so forth.

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, can this document be admitted,

 4     please?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 6             Is it Exhibit 6000?  Yes.  Exhibit P6000.

 7             Have we seen that document referred to in this document, i.e.,

 8     Instruction on the Treatment of Prisoners --

 9             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I will --

10             JUDGE KWON: -- issued by the --

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  -- be showing you in just one moment,

12     Your Honour.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Oh, yes.  Thank you.

14             MS. SUTHERLAND:  It's --

15             JUDGE KWON:  Please continue, yes.

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  It's an exhibit.

17             Okay if we can quickly look at P2338 [sic].  This is dated the

18     24th of -- 2388.  It's a document dated the 24th of September.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  But --

20             MS. SUTHERLAND:  It says here that --

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- at the time I wasn't there.  I

22     was wounded.

23             MS. SUTHERLAND:

24        Q.   It's just concerning the killing of two detainees because they

25     were hit by fire while carrying out works at the Zuc hill.  And you've

Page 30409

 1     actually made your comment about that document now.  But are you aware

 2     that detainees were hit by fire when they were taken for work on Zuc?

 3        A.   On the 24th -- no, I don't believe I was aware of that.  I was in

 4     the hospital from the 18th.  I wasn't there during those days.

 5        Q.   Generally are you aware that detainees were hit by fire while

 6     carrying out works at Zuc?

 7        A.   Well, no.  I'm now telling you that I wasn't aware of the fact

 8     because I wasn't there.

 9        Q.   Okay, Mr. Trifunovic, I was going to deal with it a little later

10     but I'll deal with it now.  You said you were injured on the

11     18th of September, 1992.  In fact, apart --

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   -- from the fact that it says in the English translation of your

14     statement that it's the 18th of December, we'll leave that aside because

15     it's a translation.  But in another document, a statement that you gave

16     to the Serbian authorities when you were arrested at the end of December,

17     you said that you were arrested on the 18th of October, 1992.  So which

18     is it?  Is it September or is it October?  Would you like to see that

19     statement, the other statement?

20        A.   I was placed in detention on the 15th of December.

21        Q.   No, I'm not concerned about when you were placed in detention.

22     I'm -- oh, sorry, I misspoke.  When you were wounded, not when you were

23     arrested.  I'm sorry.  Is it September or October?

24        A.   It was on the 18th of September.

25        Q.   So why would you tell the Serbian authorities in a statement that

Page 30410

 1     you gave in December when you were arrested that you were wounded on the

 2     18th of October?

 3        A.   Perhaps it was a typing error, but this is certainly referred to

 4     in the documents.

 5        Q.   Okay.  We'll get back to where we were.

 6             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Could I have the last two documents in this

 7     series and that's P02383.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  I'd like to remind you, both parties, that we need

 9     to rise 1.45 sharp, considering the next hearing.

10             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour, I won't be completed by 1.45,

11     but I understood that that's when we were finishing for today.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Does it mean that this witness should be brought

13     back --

14             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour --

15             JUDGE KWON:  -- in two weeks' time --

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I had estimated two and a half hours for

17     cross-examination and I didn't start my cross-examination until around

18     11.30 today.  So I still have roughly 45 minutes left by the end of -- at

19     the end of today.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

21             MS. SUTHERLAND:

22        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, we can see here this is dated the

23     12th of September, 1992.  It's a Semizovac Battalion request number 24 of

24     92, signed by Lieutenant Zoran Torbica for Commander Colakovic, for

25     prisoners to work on the front lines and they're needed for 11 days from

Page 30411

 1     the 13th to the 24th of September, 1992, because they want the men to dig

 2     trenches on the front line of the 3rd Company Ravno.

 3             I will show you the next document and then I will ask you a

 4     question.

 5             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we could have Exhibit P02392, please.

 6        Q.   And this is dated the 25th of November, 1992, again Semizovac

 7     Battalion, request number 104/92 for prisoners to work on the front lines

 8     "... in order to move the front line.  We need the prisoners on the

 9     26th of November ..."

10             So they're just stating it right up front that they want to use

11     the prisoners in order to move the front line.  The Semizovac barracks

12     was a battalion under your command, wasn't it?

13        A.   That was in the area of responsibility of our brigade.

14        Q.   And the document says they're in order to move the front line and

15     your position on that's not changing, I take it?

16        A.   Well, moving the front line -- well, it concerned fortification,

17     improving positions at the front line.  How were they to move the front

18     line?  With what?  We would be improving the positions and fortifying the

19     positions at that front line.

20        Q.   Mr. Trifunovic, you -- the use of detainees to carry out work

21     such as digging trenches, fortifying, carrying ammunition and material

22     and being used to move the front line, not only did it violate basic

23     provisions of the Geneva Conventions requiring the humane treatment of

24     prisoners of war and civilians, it also violates the prohibition in the

25     conventions of using either prisoners of war or civilians in work that is

Page 30412

 1     directly related to military activities, doesn't it?

 2        A.   We have an order from the Ministry of Defence at the time

 3     according to which it is possible to make use of them provided they are

 4     not exposed to danger.  And in our opinion, they were never exposed to

 5     danger since we were all there together.  In such case, we were all in

 6     the same position.

 7        Q.   You were never exposed to danger, then how were people killed and

 8     wounded?

 9        A.   I'm saying that they weren't there alone.  We were there

10     together, so we were all exposed.  They were there when that work was

11     being carried out, they were there together with our troops.

12        Q.   So that's all right, then.  If they're there with your troops,

13     then that's okay, to take detainees to work in combat areas; is that what

14     you're saying?

15        A.   No.  I'm only referring to the ministerial order that was

16     compiled by the minister of defence.

17        Q.   Okay.  Let's have a look at it.

18             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Can I have Exhibit P01134, please.

19        Q.   Is this the Instruction on the Treatment of Prisoners that you

20     were talking about?

21             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can go to page 2 in the English and the

22     B/C/S.

23        Q.   Is that what you were talking about by the minister of defence,

24     Mr. Subotic, issuing these instructions on the treatment of prisoners?

25     Mr. Trifunovic, is that what you were talking about, this document?

Page 30413

 1        A.   I can't see this very well, but this is probably the document.

 2        Q.   Okay.

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can go back to page 1 of the English

 4     and B/C/S --

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second, just a second.

 6             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We could show the Serbian version,

 8     1D298, it's more legible.  The English one can remain.  1D298 could

 9     perhaps be shown, as it is more legible.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Do you mind, Ms. Sutherland?

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Not at all.  Now if we can zoom in on

12     paragraph 10.  Unfortunately, in the B/C/S, paragraph 10 goes over

13     two pages, but so -- if we just rid of the English for the moment so that

14     we can let the witness read the entirety of paragraph 10.

15        Q.   And let me know when you've read that provision.

16        A.   Paragraph 10, is it?

17        Q.   Yes.

18        A.   I've read it.

19        Q.   Okay.

20             MS. SUTHERLAND:  If we can reduce the B/C/S and bring the English

21     back, please.

22        Q.   So we can see, Mr. Trifunovic, that Article 10, the one that

23     you've been quoting in your documents when you request prisoners from

24     Planjo's is:

25             "Besides work connected with the cleaning and maintenance of the

Page 30414

 1     camp, captured persons may be put to work in agriculture, industry,

 2     mining, handicrafts, traffic, trade, and other areas which are not

 3     directly related to war operations."

 4             So how do you reconcile taking someone to a combat zone with this

 5     order with these instructions?  Would you like me to repeat the question?

 6        A.   Go ahead then, repeat it.

 7        Q.   So I read Article 10.  Would you like me to read the contents of

 8     Article 10 again?  I don't think I need to do that.  My question was

 9     after I read the article:  How do you reconcile taking someone to a

10     combat zone with this -- with these instructions?

11        A.   Well, it says they can't be used for fortifying camps.  These

12     aren't camps.  These are lines, trenches for defence.

13        Q.   No.  The article says:

14             "... which are not directly related to war operations."

15        A.   Well, I believe that they are not directly related to war

16     operations if we are working together at fortifying the positions.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. Sutherland, shall we stop here and discuss how

18     to proceed from herein terms of scheduling.

19             Mr. Trifunovic, we'll have to adjourn very soon for today and we

20     are going to have a long break after this and resume only on -- in the

21     week after, i.e., Tuesday, 27th of November.  So I apologise for your

22     inconvenience, but I have to ask whether there would be no problem on

23     your part to return to The Hague to complete your evidence,

24     Mr. Trifunovic.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll return.

Page 30415

 1             JUDGE KWON:  I appreciate your kind understanding.

 2             Two or three minutes.  Is there any matter to raise?

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND: [Microphone not activated]

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have further questions?

 5             MS. SUTHERLAND: [Microphone not activated]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, if you have --

 7             MS. SUTHERLAND: [Microphone not activated] -- can the witness be

 8     instructed not to discuss his evidence with anyone, including the

 9     Defence?

10             JUDGE KWON:  You don't have any further question for today?

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  No, Your Honour, that's correct.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Trifunovic, we'll adjourn now, but I'd like to

13     advise you about the rule and practice at the Tribunal which is that the

14     witness is not supposed to discuss about his testimony with anybody else

15     while or until he completes his evidence.  Do you understand that, sir?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Then the hearing is adjourned.

18                           [The witness stands down]

19                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.43 p.m.,

20                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 27th day of

21                           November, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.