1 Wednesday, 29 January 2014
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone. Today we'll be sitting
7 pursuant to Rule 15 bis with Judge Morrison away. This will continue for
8 the remainder of this week.
9 Good morning, Mr. Harvey.
10 MR. HARVEY: Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours. May I
11 introduce Ms. Emily Elliot, who holds degrees in politics and law from
12 the UK, and she's been with us since last November. Thank you, kindly.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Sutherland. Please continue.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Good morning, Your Honours. May we go into
15 private session.
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Due to the protective measures granted to the
17 witness, we'll go into private session.
18 [Private session]
11 Pages 46124-46126 redacted. Private session.
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND:
1 Q. Now, sir, you mention this one -- seeing this one dead body, but
2 you did see others, yes?
3 A. I didn't see other bodies behind that body. I assume that it was
4 done at the time when we were absent from the Omarska camp, in other
5 words at night.
6 Q. I mean, did you -- you did see other dead bodies around the camp.
7 We have evidence in this case that dead bodies could be seen lying around
8 the camp, in particular near the white house, on a very regular basis.
9 Now, you worked in the camp for almost three months, eight to ten hours
10 every day. And is it your evidence that you didn't see at any other time
11 during that period any dead bodies lying around the camp?
12 A. At the time I saw this one body, I didn't see any others.
13 Q. No, I'm talking about at any other -- on any other occasion, is
14 it your evidence that you saw no other bodies on any other occasion?
15 A. Well, now I can't remember exactly. Next to the white house?
16 Q. Anywhere.
17 A. I can't remember now.
18 Q. In your Stanisic/Zupljanin testimony, you refer to the Omarska
19 camp a number of times as a remand centre. This wasn't a remand prison
20 for the huge number of persons detained there, was it? A remand --
22 A. We started working there and we called it the operative
23 investigation centre. In time, as people started arriving in large
24 numbers, I can agree - and I concede - that it could no longer be called
25 a reception investigation centre.
1 Q. That's right, because a remand prison is where suspects who have
2 been charged are held awaiting trial, and it also requires a remand order
3 for the detention, doesn't it?
4 A. That is the case under the law.
5 Q. You either have a detention order issued by the police to hold
6 someone for three days or a court order for 30 days which can be extended
7 by a chamber of a court for an additional period of time; correct?
8 A. In normal circumstances that is the case. However, there was a
9 state of war in Prijedor at the time. A conflict broke out between the
10 paramilitary formations on the one hand and the police and the army on
11 the other. Certain areas of town and villages in the municipality of
12 Prijedor were being mopped up, and simply this could not be adhered to at
13 this point. I do agree with you that what you've just said is the
14 procedure under the law.
15 Q. No charges were brought against the overwhelmingly vast majority
16 of detainees?
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. And some civilians were held for up to nearly three months
19 without any justification?
20 A. In fact, in my evidence in Zupljanin and Stanisic, I said that
21 our position was that in respect of those persons about whom there was no
22 interesting operative information, and that was category 3 under our
23 categorisation, should be released. However, an order arrived from
24 Mr. Drljaca that nobody should be released regardless of the intelligence
25 gathered about them, and that's how this group of more than 1.000
1 individuals stayed on in Omarska throughout the time.
2 Q. Now we have an exhibit in this case, P02772, dated the
3 5th of August, 1992, from the Prijedor SJB which states that 1.446 people
4 for which valid documentation exists would be transferred to Manjaca.
5 And on the 6th of August, 1992, over a thousand detainees were
6 transferred from Omarska to Manjaca.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: Now, Your Honours, I need to go into
8 private session to continue this questioning.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 [Private session]
11 Pages 46131-46132 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: We are now in open session, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE KWON: So this is your last topic?
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND:
2 Q. You testified at transcript page 16790 to 16791 that the camp was
3 cleaned up where -- the individuals who stayed in the camp for the ICRC
4 visit and that additional beds were brought in. And --
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: I'm sorry, Your Honour, we're going to need to
6 go into private session again.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
8 [Private session]
11 Page 46135 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: We are now in open session, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE KWON: So, Ms. Sutherland, you conclude your
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, do you have any re-examination?
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, your Excellency, a few
4 Good morning, your Excellencies. Good morning to all.
5 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
6 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Witness.
7 A. Good morning.
8 Q. I would kindly like to ask for assistance if I do not say on time
9 that we should go into closed session, but I assume that won't be
10 necessary. I'll do my best.
11 Please, Witness, today on page 12 you gave an answer in the
12 affirmative to the effect that these 175 persons were left in Omarska
13 only so that they could be shown as such to the International Red Cross.
14 Was that the only reason why these 175 persons were left there after the
15 transport of the other 1.000 to Manjaca?
16 A. That's the reason I know. As for other reasons, no. Right now I
17 haven't got any explanation.
18 Q. Thank you. Beforehand, when there were several thousand there,
19 could you have obtained these beds and could you have made it more
21 A. Well, no. In terms of the number of people who were there, it
22 was not possible. There wasn't enough room for all those beds.
23 Q. Thank you. On page 11, a document was shown to you, D30752, and
24 it says there that I don't know how many - 400-something - had been dealt
25 with and a promise is being made that within a week others would be dealt
1 with. But before that, I'd like to ask you the following: Do you know
2 whether, and if so to what extent, the ministry and the CSB from
3 Banja Luka made sure that these investigations were based on the law?
4 Did they send orders, documents, et cetera?
5 A. The chief of the Prijedor station, Mr. Drljaca, received all of
6 that because they were linked to Banja Luka from an organisational point
7 of view. I mean, Simo would from time to time give us information
8 specifically in relation to that unit. I mean, they had come from
9 Banja Luka to help. As for the other details, I cannot say because I was
10 in Omarska all the time and I was not in a position to see all of these
12 Q. Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. If the participants --
17 JUDGE KWON: Before we proceed further, could the Chamber move
18 into private session very briefly.
20 [Private session]
7 [Open session]
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we are in open session.
9 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Witness, please, take a look at this, the 9th of August,
13 Drljaca is sending information to the security services centre of
14 Banja Luka that is in charge. And look at this, it says in the second
15 paragraph, right now -- or rather, at this moment 175 prisoners of war
16 are at this centre and they are being processed criminally in order to
17 establish individual responsibilities in the armed rebellion in the
18 Prijedor municipality territory. And further on, it says that it is an
19 open centre. You knew of one purpose. Do you allow for the possibility
20 that this was another reason why the 175 were left there, so that
21 investigations could be carried out fully?
22 A. I don't know right now. I mean, really I cannot recall, I mean
23 whether there were any additional investigations at that point in time in
24 relation to these persons.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. While we're waiting, Mr. Witness, do you know what was the date?
5 The 16th of August. Do you know whether all of the documents were sent
6 to Manjaca? Full documentation.
7 A. Well, I guess so, but I cannot say anything because I no longer
8 took part in the elaboration of that documentation; that is to say that I
9 went to the official premises of the state security and continued work.
10 Q. Thank you. We haven't got the original Serbian version, so I'm
11 going to read this out to you, the part that matters. The reference is
12 the dispatch of the 19th of August. And now I'm going to read it out in
13 English so that they could translate this for you.
14 [In English] "We repeat our orders that all CSBs, SJBs, and their
15 organisational units, that is all staff of the
16 Ministry of Internal Affairs, must treat prisoners of war and civilian
17 refugee in a manner which is in accordance with the laws, within the
18 competence of the MUP and compliance with the standards set by the law of
19 war and international conventions pertinent to these matters.
20 "You are requested to immediately report to the ministry of any
21 existence of illicit prisoners, camps, and similar facilities, and on any
22 persons who may have violated the laws of international conventions in
23 their treatment of prisoners of war and refugees."
24 [Interpretation] A moment ago you said to us that at morning
25 meetings you cautioned people. This position of the ministry and of the
1 CSB, how does that fit into your own experience? What was the position
2 of the authorities on the whole, as far as the treatment of detainees and
3 refugees was concerned?
4 A. I think that the position of the authorities was that people
5 should work in accordance with the law and as stated in this dispatch,
6 this document. However, in Prijedor, practically, something happened and
7 the law was not observed to a large extent; that is to say, things
8 happened, things that were not supposed to happen on the basis of the
9 law. And I'm saying that, I mean, for the most part, this is something
10 that individuals did, a small number of guards and a small number of
11 inspectors. Quite simply, they did not behave in accordance with their
12 authority or in accordance with the law. A few times I issued warnings,
13 cautions, to guards and colleagues from Banja Luka, too. And this guard
14 gave me the following comment: He asked me whether I felt sorry for
15 Muslims if that is how I treated him, and this person from Banja Luka
16 said, I have nothing to do with you, I have my chief in Banja Luka. And
17 I respect this position taken by Minister Stanisic and what he sent, but
18 individuals in Prijedor did not take that into account.
19 Q. Thank you. Can you say whether this was a majority or a
20 minority? Can you tell us whether this was the exception or the rule,
21 these situations when the law was not observed?
22 A. Well, of course it was a minority. I mean, a number of these
23 reserve officers at the Prijedor station really behaved in a manner that
24 was improper for a policeman. But it seems that they were not trained
25 sufficiently, so they did not know how to behave. Unfortunately, even
1 some inspectors behaved contrary to all conventions, Geneva Conventions,
2 and these legal provisions adopted by our own authorities at the level of
3 the republic and at the level of the organisational units, centres and
5 Q. Thank you. Did our authorities encourage or discourage this kind
6 of behaviour?
7 A. Well, on the whole I think that -- I mean, the authorities did
8 indicate that all conduct should be based on law, but we see that not all
9 individuals respected that.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted.
12 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Sutherland.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: No objection, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE KWON: So this is document from Stanisic addressed to the
15 CSB Banja Luka, and then it circulated to all SJBs again. Am I correct
16 in so understanding?
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You are correct, Excellency. The
18 minister is having this document sent through the Banja Luka centre to
19 the stations, but it has to do with all stations and centres.
20 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We'll receive it.
21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D4255, Your Honours.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This was 65 ter 18 -- 418. There
23 is a Serbian version under that number, but I didn't manage to find it.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We did not hear the next
1 JUDGE KWON: Could you repeat the number.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 65 ter 18430.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. You were asked, Mr. Witness, about the ban on releases. Were
5 there individual releases, though, and could the fate of persons be
6 controlled? Or what would ultimately happen to these individuals that
7 would be taken out?
8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
9 JUDGE KWON: I'm told that we have another one in different
10 number which has an English translation.
11 THE REGISTRAR: [Microphone not activated]
12 JUDGE KWON: Microphone.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D4255 will be substituted with
14 65 ter 18430.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Are we going to see that?
16 JUDGE KWON: I'm not following this. What we are seeing now is
17 65 ter 18430. This is different from what we admitted as Exhibit D4255.
18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, we can -- we can look to provide
20 the B/C/S document of --
21 JUDGE KWON: Just a --
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- D4255 if the Defence aren't able to locate
24 JUDGE KWON: Just, let's leave it. We leave it as D4255 as it is
25 now and then we deal with this one.
1 Please go on. Carry on, Mr. Karadzic.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The Serbian version of D4255 is
3 65 ter 18418, and I asked for 430, and I don't think that it's the same
4 text. This one is of the 21st of August and the one a few moments ago
5 was the 24th of August.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Could you please focus on the Serbian version, Mr. Witness, and
8 could you help us with this. It says here:
9 "In our dispatches we ... informed you of the position of the
10 order of the Ministry of the Interior and other organs of the
11 Republika Srpska regarding the disbanding of collection centres," and so
13 The second paragraph says:
14 "At the same time, chiefs of police stations were informed that
15 they should arrange the transport and return of isolated persons to the
16 municipalities and areas from which they had come in conjunction with the
17 municipality authorities in those areas."
18 How does this fit into your own knowledge about people being
19 allowed to go home and having transportation organised for them? Is this
21 A. I cannot say it is correct or incorrect because I don't know. I
22 did not have this document, and, I mean, before I testified. I haven't
23 been made aware of it. And I cannot say yes or no. I mean, quite
24 simply, I don't know. I don't know of this activity.
25 Q. But were people being allowed to go home? Were there releases?
1 Does this document indicate that and do you know that?
2 A. Well, we did release some people at -- however, at the very start
3 of the work of the investigation centre was that those individuals, in
4 respect of whom there was no interesting intelligence, should be
5 released, and we did release them. However, there followed the order by
6 Chief Drljaca that -- without consulting him. And so in the end,
7 category 3 was sent to Trnopolje, despite our insistence that they be
8 released; whereas the remainder were sent to Manjaca, and that's what I
10 Q. Thank you. Please look at paragraph 3. It says here:
11 "However" --
12 JUDGE KWON: I think now I understood it. The first page of the
13 B/C/S that we are seeing now, isn't that the original version of the
14 English that we saw as being Exhibit D4255? Because this is dated as
15 21st of August, but English translation is 24th of August, which is the
16 translation of the second page of this document. I checked this
17 reference number. I think it matches with the previous one.
18 Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'm a tad confused as well, but we
20 can see that this document is signed by Zupljanin in the -- the original.
21 So I'm -- and -- and the English has Drljaca's --
22 JUDGE KWON: Well, yes, Drljaca appears on the second page of
23 this document. So we do not have -- that means that we do not have
24 English translation for this first page.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is possible, because page 2 was
1 translated. It's page 2 in Serbian and 1 in English. It's possible,
2 however, that this is the case. We'll look into that.
3 JUDGE KWON: But --
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Please look at paragraph 3 --
6 JUDGE KWON: -- is it not possible the same document signed by
7 Mico Stanisic was circulated by Zupljanin from the CSB in Banja --
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, that's -- that's what I'm
9 assuming --
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- when I'm looking at the B/C/S version.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes. So we are looking at the same document,
13 actually. But I'm not sure.
14 So I leave it to you, Mr. Karadzic.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Overlapping speakers]
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: I'm sorry, Your Honour, it just appears that
17 these two documents aren't correlating at all. I mean, if we look at the
18 first paragraph of the B/C/S, it refers to two broad numbers --
19 broadge [phoen] numbers and then --
20 JUDGE KWON: It's evident. It's obvious that the English
21 document dated 24th is not the translation of this. That's obvious. But
22 my question for Mr. Karadzic is whether this document is the one we
23 already saw earlier on.
24 But please continue.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Elements are being repeated. This
1 has to do with the implementation of an order or a telegram from the
2 Ministry of the Interior at various levels, from security services
3 centres to public security stations. Certain elements are being repeated
4 but not everything is the same.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Can you help us? It reads:
7 "There are some indications that isolated individuals could be
8 subject to assault, or, rather, threats upon their return."
9 To the best of your knowledge, who would assault them or expose
10 them to threats upon their return? Would it be representatives of the
11 authority or somebody else?
12 A. Well, of course they would be individuals or groups holding
13 opposite views or being members of other ethnicities and religions. That
14 could be expected because it was a multiethnic community and such
15 tensions were there before, and unfortunately are still present now.
16 Q. Thank you. This position about providing protection to the
17 released, how does it stand in relation to the position of the
18 authorities with regard to treating these individuals?
19 A. Well, based on the documents shown to me, the authorities have
20 shown to be in favour of complying with the law, the minister of the
21 interior sending this letter. That's to say, in my own work I always
22 advocated the position that the individuals who did not engage in
23 unlawful activity and in respect of whom there is no interesting
24 intelligence should be released and be free to go about their lives.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this document be admitted.
2 JUDGE KWON: We'll mark the first page of this document for
3 identification pending English translation.
4 THE REGISTRAR: As MFI D4256, Your Honours.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. A moment ago, Witness, you told us that there were individual
8 cases of people being released on occasion and that Drljaca forbade
9 people from being released without him knowing about it. Was it the case
10 that he banned this on condition that he be informed or that he banned it
11 in general?
12 A. Well, as far as I know, it was about him asking that nobody
13 should be released from the investigation centre unless he was informed
14 about it.
15 Q. To your knowledge, was Mr. Drljaca a member of the Crisis Staff
16 by virtue of his office?
17 A. That should have been case.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the witness be briefly shown
19 P2741, which the Prosecution cited. Can we direct our attention to
20 item 5.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. It says:
23 "Following the appropriate procedure on the part of the competent
24 organs, the other prisoners found to be innocent would be released from
1 So how does this accord with your experience about this case?
2 A. Well, this accords with what I said, that we had the intention of
3 releasing such individuals, according them freedom of movement. And that
4 was our position from the very start, from the early days of the
5 investigation centre.
6 Q. Can I direct your attention to the heading. It is a document of
7 the Crisis Staff dated 2nd of June, 1992; right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. At page 11, we have D03752. A promise is made --
10 this is the 16th of August. A promise is made that the rest of the
11 documentation will be sent in a week's time.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the witness be shown D1866.
13 That date was the 17th, and now this is the 23rd of August.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. It reads:
16 "We are hereby informing you that documentation is required
17 concerning the prisoners of war who have been transferred from the
18 Omarska investigation centre" -- or rather, "that the required
19 documentation concerning the prisoners of war who had been transferred
20 from the Omarska investigation centre to the Manjaca prisoner of war camp
21 was forwarded to the commander ..."
22 So was the promise made on the 17th made good on, and was the
23 delay deliberate or was, indeed, some time required for the documentation
24 to be transferred?
25 A. Well, I think that because of the volume of documentation, the
1 processing did take some time, hence the date.
2 Q. Thank you. My last question: At page 9, you were told that it
3 was observed in Manjaca that among the prisoners there were those who
4 were unfit to hold a rifle, let alone run. You were asked about
5 category 2. Can you tell us, was it possible for those who were unfit to
6 hold a rifle to commit criminal offences against general security and
7 safety, the state, and the constitution? I'm referring to the
8 individuals from category 2.
9 A. Well, I know of one case and I know the person myself. He was
10 taken in, even though he was more than 65 years old. He had two
11 hand-grenades that he got from a relative and that was the reason why he
12 was brought in. I don't know of any other cases.
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Witness. I have no further questions.
14 JUDGE KWON: Very well. While the witnesses here with us, the
15 Chamber wishes to return to the issue raised yesterday in relation to the
16 admission of 1D9645, 1D9646, 1D9647, and 1D9649, discussed during the
17 testimony of this witness. These four documents are Official Notes or
18 compilations thereof from 1992.
19 The Chamber has reviewed the examples referred to by the
20 Prosecution yesterday and wishes to remind the parties of its oral ruling
21 of the 11th of December, 2012, in which it clarified the Chamber's
22 position on the admission of third party statements. The Chamber noted
23 that third party statements produced for the purpose of current criminal
24 proceedings may only be admitted pursuant to the modalities of
25 Rule 92 bis, 92 quater, and 92 quinquies and that in relation to any
1 other third party statement not prepared for the purpose of current
2 criminal proceedings, they may only be admitted if they are comment upon,
3 confirmed, or adopted by the witness on the stand. The Chamber made
4 further application of this ruling on the 13th of March, 2013, in
5 relation to 65 ter 1D7846 and 65 ter 1D855.
6 The four documents discussed yesterday fall into the category of
7 documents not prepared for the purpose of criminal proceedings and may,
8 therefore, be admitted if they are sufficiently comment upon, confirmed,
9 or adopted by the witness on the stand.
10 The Chamber is of the view that 1D9646 and 1D9647 have not been
11 sufficiently commented by the witness in the previous proceedings for the
12 purpose of admission. However, the Chamber considers that the witness's
13 comments on 1D9645 and 1D9649 are sufficient for the purpose of admission
14 of these type of documents as associated exhibits.
15 We'll assign exhibit numbers for the last two documents.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, 1D9649 will be Exhibit D4257.
17 And 1D9645 will be Exhibit D4258.
18 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. That concludes your evidence,
19 Mr. Witness. On behalf of the Chamber, I would like to thank you for
20 your coming to The Hague to give it. Now you are free to go.
21 Given the timing, the Chamber will take a break now. You will
22 rise all together with us. We'll break for half an hour and resume at
23 quarter to 11.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 10.16 a.m.
25 [The witness withdrew]
1 --- On resuming at 10.46 a.m.
2 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger, you requested six hours for the
3 cross-examination of Witness Mico Stanisic. But before that, I was
4 wondering whether this witness should be led live in light of our
5 practice? Mr. Stanisic refused to testify voluntarily and was therefore
6 subpoenaed. The important witnesses in a similar situation were ordered
7 to testify viva voce, weren't they?
8 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, there have been instances
9 where -- where these witnesses have been -- have been ordered to testify
10 viva voce, particularly if they were close to Dr. Karadzic. In this
11 case, Mr. Stanisic co-operated with us and I worked with him personally
12 to try to make what I thought was a very clear, cogent statement. And we
13 believed that it would be better if that statement were used as a 92 ter.
14 And given the amount of time that the Prosecution has asked for
15 cross-examination, they should have plenty of opportunity to decide on
16 his credibility without having to have us lead him live.
17 JUDGE KWON: Given his position and the proximity with the
18 accused, it would be consistent the Chamber should order him to testify
19 viva voce.
20 Mr. Tieger, do you have any observation on this?
21 MR. TIEGER: No, Mr. President. And I was scouring my memory to
22 recall if any failure on the Prosecution's part to make a motion similar
23 to ones it did in the past was the result of inertia or a sense that the
24 Trial Chamber would intervene on its own or desire not to raise the issue
25 on too many individual occasions. Nevertheless, I -- I can't identify at
1 the moment a distinction between the witnesses for whom viva voce
2 testimony was required based on their positions at the time and
3 Mr. Stanisic and his position. But I did send an e-mail to see if there
4 was something in particular that I might be missing. In any event, I
5 think the Court's point appears to be well taken.
6 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, if I could add one more thing.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
8 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, can you also take into
9 consideration that this is very late in the day, both in terms of
10 proximity to the time of his testimony and to the close of our case. So,
11 first of all, we invested a lot of time in preparing this statement which
12 we wouldn't have done if we'd known that he was to be viva voce. But,
13 more importantly, between now and the end of the case, we are trying very
14 much to use every available moment to help prepare Dr. Karadzic's
15 testimony. And to now have to have him prepare to lead Mr. Stanisic live
16 will take away from that and make us less ready to begin his testimony
17 when that time comes, which is rapidly approaching. So I hope you can
18 take that into consideration as well. Again, I think this is a very
19 clear, focused statement by this witness and you would not be losing
20 anything by having his testimony under 92 ter.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
22 MR. TIEGER: Well, since we're engaged in this discussion, simply
23 to note that I'm not sure that necessarily follows. It would appear that
24 the time that Mr. Robinson is referring to that was, according to him,
25 invested in the preparation of the statement, is a -- lays the groundwork
1 for either the submission of that statement, or, as the Court is now
2 indicating, would be more beneficial to the Court leading the witness
3 live. I mean, it appears that the prep work has essentially been done
4 one way or another.
5 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will consider this issue and will give
6 its ruling during the course of today or first thing tomorrow.
7 Yes. Shall we bring in the next witness.
8 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, while we're doing that, I've been
9 asked to advise you that we do now have the translation of Exhibit D4255
10 in e-court under 65 ter number 18418. And we would ask that the status
11 of that exhibit be confirmed as a full exhibit as opposed to MFI.
12 JUDGE KWON: I'm sorry, are we talking about 4255 or 4256?
13 MR. ROBINSON: 4255.
14 JUDGE KWON: We admitted in full because we had English only. So
15 you found the original?
16 MR. ROBINSON: Yes. We found the B/C/S, yes.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll supplement it.
18 [The witness entered court]
19 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, sir. Do you hear me in the language
20 you understand?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Will you make the solemn declaration.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
24 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
25 WITNESS: DUSKO JAKSIC
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Jaksic. Please be seated and make
3 yourself comfortable.
4 Yes, Mr. Karadzic. Please proceed.
5 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
6 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Professor Jaksic.
7 A. Good morning, Mr. President.
8 Q. Like with anyone who speaks our language, I have to ask you to
9 leave a short pause between questions and answers and to speak slowly so
10 that everything is properly recorded.
11 A. I understand.
12 Q. Professor, have you given a statement to my Defence team?
13 A. Yes, I have given them a statement and signed it.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 1D49063
15 in e-court, please.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Do you see before you that statement? I will explain these
18 blanks. Is this the first page of the statement?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. Do not be confused by the fact that several paragraphs are
21 blacked out. The Chamber found them to be of no assistance because they
22 are related to events in Croatia, not Bosnia. Have you signed this
24 A. Yes, I have.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the last page be shown,
1 please, so that the witness may identify his signature.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is my signature.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Thank you. Does this statement faithfully and accurately reflect
5 what you have said to my Defence team?
6 A. Completely faithfully.
7 Q. Thank you. If I were to put to you the same questions that were
8 asked when the statement was taken, would your answers be essentially the
9 same as in the statement?
10 A. I would not change the answers.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I tender this statement under
13 Rule 92 ter, with the accompanying documents.
14 JUDGE KWON: We'll deal with associated exhibit separately.
15 Mr. Zec, do you have any objection to the admission of this
17 MR ZEC: No, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE KWON: We'll receive it.
19 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D4259, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE KWON: Shall we come to the exhibits?
21 Mr. Robinson, if you could assist us.
22 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, we are offering nine
23 associated exhibits; eight to be admitted and one to be marked for
24 identification as it's an intercept not involving this witness.
25 JUDGE KWON: So you are not tendering 1D7073 which has been
1 already admitted?
2 MR. ROBINSON: Correct.
3 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zec, any objections?
4 MR ZEC: We already informed the Defence that we'll be objecting
5 to admission to six of the exhibits because we believe they don't
6 consist -- they don't form part -- indispensable and inseparable part of
7 the statement.
8 JUDGE KWON: Could you identify the numbers.
9 MR ZEC: So 1D07072 through 1 -- next is 1D07074 through 1D07077.
10 And 65 ter 051 -- 414. The last one should be 65 ter 05414.
11 JUDGE KWON: We agree with you as regards 1D7072, 1D7074, and
12 1D7077. However, the Chamber is of the view as regards the remaining
13 three - i.e., 1D7075, 7076, and 65 ter 5414 - that they satisfy the
14 requirements for associated exhibit. But with respect to the last one,
15 65 ter 5414, we'll admit only those pages referred to in the statement.
16 So we'll receive the remaining four documents and we'll mark it
17 for identification pending the authentication, I mean, the intercept.
18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes, the intercept we'll mark for identification is
20 30514. The exhibit numbers will be given in due course by the Registrar
21 in writing.
22 Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please proceed.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to lead one of these
24 documents live, one of those that were not covered by the statement by
25 the live evidence. And now I would like, first of all, to read a short
1 summary of Mr. Dusko Jaksic's statement.
2 [In English] Dusko Jaksic was born on 7th of June, 1935, in
3 Celinac, Republika Srpska. From 1992 to 1995, Dusko Jaksic was the
4 director of the Institute of Economics in Banja Luka, also known as EIBL.
5 He was also an assemblyman of the socialist party SDP in the Municipal
6 Assembly of Banja Luka. In 2009, Dusko Jaksic became a senator for the
7 Republika Srpska and was later appointed as an advisor in 2011.
8 Issue arose as Banja Luka could not influence its own development
9 or that of its surrounding area. This was due to the centralisation of
10 all funds, financial institutions, and capital in Sarajevo. Banja Luka
11 and East Bosnia and Herzegovina were therefore economically behind
12 compared to the Sarajevo-Zenica region. Dusko Jaksic frequently tried to
13 prove how disastrous this policy was.
14 Dusko Jaksic advocated that Krajina be an independent state
15 should Yugoslavia separate. A draft statute was created by Dusko Jaksic
16 and Predrag Radic, the mayor of Banja Luka, to this effect. In addition,
17 a document outlining the regional organisation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
18 and the creation of a north-west Krajina region was also drafted.
19 Despite many people disagreeing and the constant obstruction by the
20 Sarajevo politics, a prominent Muslim leader like Mr. Osman Karabegovic
21 gave absolute support to Dusko Jaksic's proposals. The creation of
22 region was not intended to breakup Bosnia and Herzegovina but instead
23 strengthen it and set an example for Yugoslavia. Around June 1991,
24 Dusko Jaksic and Milorad Zivanovic drafted and proclaimed the
25 constitution of the Republic of Krajina. This constitution was signed at
1 a meeting in Banski Dvor in Banja Luka.
2 Due to the rumours that Krajina would be used for political
3 bargaining and fears that this would lead to an exodus of the population,
4 Dusko Jaksic went to Belgrade to inform Slobodan Milosevic of their
5 concerns. Upon his arrival, Dusko Jaksic met Dr. Radovan Karadzic.
6 Radovan Karadzic's lack of curiosity regarding Dusko Jaksic's arrival in
7 Belgrade illustrated the two Serbian political currents and the tense
8 relations between Republika Srpska and Krajina leadership. At the
9 beginning of the war in 1992, Krajina lost contact with the rest of
10 Republika Srpska in BH.
11 And that will be short summary of his statement. Now I would
12 like to pose a few questions to Professor Jaksic.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Professor, can you tell us how other ethnic communities in
15 Banja Luka viewed the centralisation of funds and especially this
16 decision contained in the document 1D7077 when you asked for these funds
17 to remain in Banja Luka?
18 A. All the way up to the referendum of the independence of
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina, all ethnic communities and all structures and
20 academic circles were absolutely unanimous that a higher degree of
21 independence and autonomy of Krajina is necessary. The processes that
22 took place between the 1980s and 1990s were total, so all the companies
23 in Krajina were just branch offices of companies that had headquarters in
24 Sarajevo. In that sense, there was no disagreement between Serbs,
25 Croats, and Muslims. The director was a Croat and he supported me
1 absolutely, not only as somebody who had more academic experience but he
2 supported me in a broader sense in my efforts to achieve that higher
3 degree of independence.
4 Q. Can I ask you to speak more slowly because we will have problems.
5 Already we are missing one thing. You said that centralisation favoured
6 central companies in Sarajevo.
7 A. I'll give you one example. In 1969 --
8 JUDGE KWON: Sorry, sorry.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- Banja Luka experienced an
11 JUDGE KWON: Just is a second, Mr. Jaksic. If you want to say
12 something after Mr. Karadzic's words, please give us some pause because
13 both Mr. Karadzic's words and your words have to be translated.
14 Yes, could you repeat.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One example, in
16 1960 [as interpreted], the city of Banja Luka experienced a destructive
17 earthquake, seven degrees by Richter. At the level of Yugoslavia, a
18 major fund was created to reconstruct Banja Luka. That fund was not
19 located in Banja Luka as an institution, it was based in Sarajevo, and
20 the administration of Banja Luka and the broader area that was affected
21 could not make any decisions for the purposeful use of these funds. From
22 that moment on, the centralisation of all the other types in the economy
23 and the public sector was only accelerated. There remained only one
24 bank, the Privredna banka of Sarajevo with its branch offices in the
25 republic. All the major companies, industrial enterprises, were based in
1 Sarajevo, and all the way up to 1975, the only university was in
2 Sarajevo. I wouldn't go into much detail, but the consequence of that is
3 that Krajina began to be drained demographically very quickly, and the
4 same goes for the eastern Bosnia as a whole.
5 There was one form of economic association, that was the chamber
6 of commerce. In Banja Luka, the chamber of commerce covered
7 17 municipalities, 16 municipalities had a lower than replacement
8 birthrate, and only one municipality had a positive birthrate.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. It was said about Banja Luka that it had only a symbolically
11 positive birthrate.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Witness confirms.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Thank you, Professor.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D7077 is the document I would now
16 like to call up in e-court.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Please look at this. This is a short record from the
19 13th session of the Assembly of Banja Luka municipality held on
20 27 November 1991, which was just two or three months before the war broke
21 out. On the first page, Professor, is it the case that we see that it
22 was a joint session, a session of the joint assembly, representing all
23 ethnic communities and all parties?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. There were 99 people present.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we show page 9 in Serbian and
2 page 15 in English, and then we will look at page 16.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Help us here, Professor, with the conclusions. Many people took
5 part in the debate including Muslims. You were a representative of the
6 socialist party; Ganic represented the SDA; Turkanovic [phoen] SDA;
7 Mormerovic [phoen] SDA, and so on. Look at conclusion number 3. It
8 deals with the preparation of a proposal to suspend allocation of funds
9 from Banja Luka municipality for the activities at the level of the
10 republic enumerated above and instead keep those funds in Banja Luka.
11 Was this justified economically, and who voted in favour of this
13 A. I cannot describe the climate that prevailed at the time, but
14 what I do know is that there was no resistance to such a conclusion being
15 adopted along the ethnic lines. I have to emphasise that a year or a
16 year and a half prior to this, the only bank in Bosnia-Herzegovina which
17 detached itself from the system of banks in Sarajevo covering all the
18 banks in Bosnia was Privredna banka Banja Luka, which got detached from
19 Privredna banka Sarajevo. So in Bosnia we had the Privredna banka
20 Sarajevo which had its branch offices in 108 municipalities in
21 Bosnia-Herzegovina; whereas only Banja Luka had its own Privredna banka
22 with a Croat as its CEO. And that was the start of this process of
23 resistance to the centralisation of Sarajevo. And this is just a similar
24 example to one that I've given about the bank.
25 Q. Thank you. Was this a detachment of the bank economically
1 motivated or ethnically motivated?
2 A. Well, I did say that the director was a Croat,
3 Goran Pegan [phoen], and he was the one who was the greatest of advocates
4 for this decentralisation. He had great political opponents, but I think
5 that the Serbs were among the majority of his supporters.
6 Q. It reads here that the report was unanimously adopted. Was this
7 indeed the case, do you recall?
8 A. Well, I can't say with any certainty whether it was unanimously
9 adopted, though I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the minutes.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like the tender the
11 document into evidence.
12 JUDGE KWON: Any objection, Mr. Zec?
13 MR ZEC: The witness didn't confirm anything. And secondly, I
14 don't see relevance. But I leave it to the Chamber.
15 JUDGE KWON: I think we now have a basis to admit it. We'll
16 receive it.
17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D4260, Your Honours.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Another question or just one more question, Professor. What was
20 the position and what was the professional and political view of your
21 colleagues from the international community with regard to the process of
22 regionalisation in Bosnia-Herzegovina prior to and especially after the
23 Dayton, if you know what these positions were?
24 A. If I may, I would like to make two points about the events in the
25 former state. Just as all the other eastern countries, Yugoslavia
1 started the process of transition in terms of its political and economic
2 systems. The transition had three pillars: The first pillar was the
3 introduction of a multiparty system and parliamentary democracy; the
4 second pillar was the privatisation of the state capital, i.e.,
5 companies; and the third pillar was the decentralisation and the
6 strengthening of the role of the local government with a special emphasis
7 on regionalisation. Six agencies were set up at the level of Yugoslavia
8 in the respect of the six republics which were supposed to implement the
9 transition process. Five agencies were based in five capitals of the
10 republics. It was only in Bosnia-Herzegovina that the agency was not
11 based in Sarajevo but rather in Banja Luka. It was entrusted with the
12 Institute of Economics in Banja Luka and I was its director. This was
13 during Rade Markovic's government, and the decision was made to base the
14 agency not in Sarajevo but with the institute in Banja Luka because the
15 feeling was that Sarajevo was not ready to carry out this task because
16 the Sarajevo institutions and agencies would not support it.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 A. There is one more detail, if I may. Why was this entrusted with
19 the institute? This was the only institute in the former Yugoslavia
20 which affirmed itself and gained a high reputation and was not based in a
21 capital of a republic. It was often cited as a role model for other
22 agencies which should likewise get developed without being under the
23 influence of central republican authorities.
24 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us was this before the multiparty
1 A. Well, the transition process began in 1989. We got this status
2 in 1990. I think it coincided with the beginning of the election
3 campaign or just before that.
4 Q. In what way did the authorities in Sarajevo reform themselves in
5 this process of decentralisation, or did they remain as rigid as they
6 were before?
7 A. Well, these authorities tried and managed, not at the very start
8 but later on, to halt the transition process or to slow it down.
9 Q. And after the war, your colleagues from your profession and your
10 international colleagues, did they have any specific suggestions to make
11 as to how this should be done and did they accord with your own views?
12 A. We had a project of the reconstruction of Bosnia-Herzegovina
13 covering the period between 1996 and 2002. According to the official
14 documentation, it involved the sum of some 5.5 billion dollars. Numerous
15 projects were implemented covering refugees all the way to privatisation
16 according to a new model. Between 2003 and 2005 the European commission
17 engaged two institutions, one from Northern Ireland and another from
18 Italy, to develop a project which aimed at setting up the regional
19 organisation of Bosnia-Herzegovina with an emphasis on economic regions.
20 However, the latter was supposed to be designed in such a way as not to
21 in any way impair the entities of the federation and Republika Srpska.
22 And this sort of approach had the undivided support of the
23 representatives of the federation, particularly the Bosniak side, but it
24 was rejected by Republika Srpska despite the fact that to a large degree
25 over 90 per cent the project would have created the regions in the same
1 way as we had suggested that it be done in 1991.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can 1D49064 be shown to the
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. While we're waiting for this, Professor, had your proposal for
7 the regionalisation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and ours been accepted before
8 the referendum in Bosnia-Herzegovina, how would the situation have
9 unfolded? Would there have been a war?
10 A. I was called here in the capacity of a witness, and I accepted
11 that role for several reasons, as a fact witness. However, if I were to
12 look at the documents and the various situations which I thought were
13 important enough for me to appear before this Court, then I would have to
14 mention the regionalisation project and everything that was happening
15 around it, and I don't think it will be a waste of time if I mention the
16 last session of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Assembly.
17 There is one document, and I have it here, about it. The session
18 lasted late into the night until 1.30 in the morning. This was a
19 document entitled: "Conditions and Possibilities for the Introduction of
20 a Regional Structure of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Creating the Region of
21 North-western Bosnia, Project and Tasks," which was drafted by the
22 Institute of Economics. So this was a project which had yet to be
23 developed by someone. The date is March 1991.
24 Q. Sir, can you tell us what it is that we are looking at on our
1 A. What we see on the screen is the front page of the document that
2 I've mentioned. We see the title of the project -- on the right-hand
3 side, we see the title of the project which was produced in 2004 by those
4 two agencies that I mentioned.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the next page.
6 Q. The title is the same: Regional strategy of the regional
7 development of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And I'm referring to the title of the
8 project that was commissioned by the European commission; is that right?
9 A. Yes. It's called the EURED project. You can see the original
10 logo here.
11 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us what this map represents?
12 A. It represents a proposal of dividing Bosnia-Herzegovina into five
13 regions. One of them is Krajina, and that's the left-hand side of the
14 map. It's, in fact, north-western Bosnia. And the only difference
15 between this project and our initial project is in the municipality of
16 Teslic, which here is added to the Central Bosnia region; whereas, we
17 thought it should be part of the Krajina. Therefore, the scope of this
18 region is the same except for Teslic. The remainder was supposed to be
19 four regions, whereas in our initial document we envisaged three rather
20 than four regions.
21 The institute and I, myself, are very well familiar with the
22 process of creating regions normally applied in the European Union, and
23 everything we did was, in fact, in compliance with the standards of the
24 European Union.
25 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us this: Did the SDS or the political
1 circles in general interfere with what you were doing, trying to exert
2 some sort of pressure, or was this done solely according to the economic
4 A. Well, this was done in 1989, 1990, when the general public was
5 not informed of this at all -- or rather, the professional circles were
6 very familiar with these efforts at regionalisation. Now, with the
7 arrival of the SDS and other parties on to the scene, the
8 already-existing climate was seized upon because it was a good basis for
9 organising the economy in quite concrete terms in what were time of
10 confusion, in fact. Let me repeat: Had we not been as prepared as we
11 were and had there not been this view been taken in respect of the
12 regions, had this preparatory work not been done, I wonder what life and
13 the economy would have been like had the war broken out without all this
14 having been done previously.
15 Many professional and economic circles joined these efforts
16 because they thought that regions, per se, were a justified form of
17 economic organisation. Had this not been the case, other less competent
18 individuals and institutions would have come to the fore and the
19 situation would have been far worse.
20 Q. In line 16 and 17, can this be corrected? The witness said: It
21 was done in 1989, 1990, and it was general knowledge and very much known
22 to the public rather than: It was not known. And this was at a time
23 when the SDS was not formed.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I may add something.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Yes.
2 A. The Institute of Economics in Sarajevo, one of the two such
3 institutes in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in the period between 1986 and 1990
4 implemented eight projects which had to do with the regionalisation which
5 had been given by the scientific fund which I headed for a while. You
6 have them in this material. They were all listed there according to the
7 various topics that they covered.
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Professor.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this.
10 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. I think I have to clarify this with
11 you, Mr. Jaksic. It's about our transcript, whether it's recorded
13 To the question of Mr. Karadzic whether SDS or the political
14 circles in general interfere with what you were doing, trying to exert
15 some sort of pressure, or was this done solely according to the economic
16 principles. Your answer was recorded like this, I quote:
17 "Well, this was done in 1989, 1990, when the general public was
18 not informed of this at all. Or rather, the professional circles were
19 very familiar with --"
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the contrary.
21 JUDGE KWON: -- "these ..."
22 So did you say that the general public was informed of this?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that the general public was
24 well informed, very well informed, as a matter of fact. And that had to
25 do with regionalisation until 1990 --
1 JUDGE KWON: [Overlapping speakers]
2 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
3 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters did not hear the last
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a member of the SDP and I was
6 a member of parliament for the SDP.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. That's sufficient for your answer.
8 Shall we mark it, this document for identification.
9 Mr. Zec, do you have any observation or objection.
10 MR ZEC: Again, it's about relevance but I'll leave it to the
12 JUDGE KWON: It's related to the regionalisation issued in one
13 way or another, so, as such, it may be relevant to a certain extent.
14 We'll mark it for identification.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As MFI D4267, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE KWON: 4267.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one. In line 11, it was not
18 recorded that the witness said that the SDS did not have anything to do
19 with regionalisation.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have no further
23 questions at this point in time.
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Jaksic, as you have noted, your evidence in
25 chief in this case has been admitted in its most part in writing; that
1 is, through your written witness statement in lieu of your oral
2 testimony. Now you will be cross-examined by the representative of the
3 Office of the Prosecutor.
4 Yes, Mr. Zec, please proceed.
5 MR ZEC: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Zec:
7 Q. Good morning to you, Mr. Jaksic.
8 A. [In English] Good morning.
9 Q. Mr. Jaksic, you told us in your statement about your political
10 background. Can you confirm that you have never been a member of the
12 A. [Interpretation] I was never a member of the SDS. I did not
13 attend a single SDS meeting.
14 Q. And you were not privy to internal SDS communications, that's
15 also correct?
16 A. A few colleagues of mine from school, from high school, that will
17 be of great interest to you. Dr. Nikola Koljevic and I went to the same
18 high school together for eight years. We're the same year, the same
19 generation. Dr. Milovan Milovanovic, who was vice-president of the
20 Assembly SDS, also went to the same class with me for eight years.
21 Dr. Bozo Bojanic, who is a lawyer, one of the founders of the SDS in
22 Banja Luka, is also my year. So for a man who lived in Banja Luka from
23 elementary school until the end of high school and started university,
24 you could not expect such a person not to have been in contact with
25 persons who belonged to the SDS. However, these were just informal
1 contacts and of course certain discussions that were inevitable.
2 Q. And in paragraph 16 through 27, you talk about the union of
3 Bosanska Krajina municipalities. When this was created back in
4 April 1991, Mr. Jaksic, other political parties - mainly, HDZ and SDA -
5 were against this regional body because they saw it as an entity which
6 was dominated by one ethnic group; right?
7 A. That is right. That is right.
8 Q. [Overlapping speakers]
9 A. The -- it was established after the recognition of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina and then the SDS, and not only the SDS, but the entire
11 population, took advantage of what had been done in terms of
12 regionalisation; that is to say, it was turned into this community of
13 municipalities. And all of these --
14 Q. Let's have a look at one article at that time and then I'll ask
15 you more.
16 MR ZEC: Can we have 65 ter 25939.
17 Q. And this is an article from "Oslobodjenje" from April 1991, which
18 talks about the creation of the union assembly of the Bosnia Krajina
20 MR ZEC: At English e-court page 7, and in the B/C/S it's toward
21 the end of the page on the left side.
22 Q. There are comments made by Stjepan Kljuic from the HDZ, and he
24 "What has been created, in short, is unconstitutional and I'm
25 sure it will not be able to exist."
1 And below that, Muhamed Cengic from SDA said:
2 "This was done behind the backs of others."
3 He said:
4 "Obviously they are trying to create a state within a state."
5 And then he continues:
6 "Economic reasons for the association are a long way from the
7 truth. These are primarily political reasons with a goal of creating a
8 state for only one nation."
9 So, Mr. Jaksic, this was the position of other political parties
10 with respect to the union of Bosanska Krajina municipalities - right? -
11 at the time?
12 A. That is quite right. At that time that was quite right.
13 MR ZEC: Mr. President, I would offer this article.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson, any objections?
15 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll receive this.
17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P6615, Your Honours.
18 MR ZEC:
19 Q. Mr. Jaksic, the idea of the Krajina region, or the ARK as it was
20 called later on, was something that SDS planned and implemented; right?
21 A. I don't think so. I don't think that that statement is right.
22 The SDS only accepted the results and what had been achieved over two or
23 three years before that in terms of creating a territorial form as we had
24 envisaged the Krajina region. They had received a good basis for
25 organisation. Of course, after the recognition of Bosnia as an
1 independent state, that was an attempt made by the SDS to remain in
2 Yugoslavia and to separate in that way. All of us from the regions
3 supported that because we thought that by establishing a region with
4 certain elements of statehood, we would have a chance of remaining in
5 Yugoslavia. So that was not the first objective for us to get a state of
6 Krajina. Rather, to get a Krajina - I'm talking about Krajina now - in
7 order to remain in Yugoslavia in that way. Had we known that there would
8 have been no Yugoslavia, then our --
9 Q. This Chamber has received evidence regarding this issue.
10 Mr. Karadzic acknowledged that the idea of regionalisation originated
11 from him and the SDS. This is in P2556 and P6243, English page 25, B/C/S
12 e-court page 29. Mr. Kupresanin said at the 20th Assembly that the
13 purpose of the region of Krajina was to destroy Alija's state. This is
14 in D456, English page 70, B/C/S e-court page 76.
15 So, Mr. Jaksic, the fact is that the idea of the Krajina region
16 was something that the SDS planned and implemented; right?
17 A. That's certainly not right. That's not right. Mr. Kupresanin,
18 whom I had not known until then, and the others, used all of the
19 materials of the economic institute, and they invited us - they invited
20 us - to interpret that, what a region means, what that means, what it is
21 economically, politically, so they used that to a large degree. They are
22 founders. They are the ones who implemented that in terms of
23 establishing bodies. However, as initiators in terms of creating this
24 form, they had inherited something that was alive before that.
25 Q. In paragraphs 18, 34, 35, and 36, you talk about your idea of
1 creating a Krajina state as a separate unit of Yugoslavia. This idea,
2 Mr. Jaksic, was something that SDS did not like and did not want to
3 happen. From this moment, the SDS saw you and the others who were behind
4 this idea as someone who wanted to separate, to separate Krajina from
5 other Serb areas and jeopardise the unity of Serbian people; right?
6 A. There were major differences. However, you have to know that the
7 Krajina was isolated for a while, totally isolated from Yugoslavia, the
8 eastern part of Bosnia, too. We who lived there and who had strong links
9 with the Serbs in the Krajina and Croatia, we had a large number of
10 refugees in our area from Croatia. And isolated in such a way, we saw as
11 our only solution -- yes?
12 Q. I understand you want to explain why you were behind this idea,
13 but my question was that the SDS was against the idea that you were about
14 to explain; that's correct, right?
15 A. The SDS was not -- of course, they were against these two lines
16 that existed. We did not negate Republika Srpska at the time. However,
17 on the condition -- I mean, if it would not manage to remain in
18 Yugoslavia, then we wanted to secure for ourselves a position which would
19 mean that we would stay in Yugoslavia. How do I put this? Politically,
20 we were rather passive. We did not interfere in military affairs. We
21 did not meddle in any way. We simply tried to organise the life of
22 people there. There was a division among people but it was not very
24 MR. ZEC: Let's have a look at 65 ter 25410.
25 Q. And this is an article of an interview that you gave in 1992.
1 And the article was published in a newspaper called "Lider." I would
2 like you to look at the page --
3 MR. ZEC: Maybe we also can have a look at the second page for
4 the witness to just recognise the -- see the articles and acknowledge
5 that that's his interview.
6 Q. So at the top it says -- it has your name.
7 MR ZEC: Second page in B/C/S.
8 Q. Your -- your photo is there. Do you remember this article --
9 this interview?
10 A. I remember that interview. I have it here.
11 MR ZEC: Can we go to English page 2. In B/C/S, it should be
12 middle of the first page.
13 Q. So here on this page, you -- that -- it's recorded, the act of
14 creation and proclamation of the Krajina state was exclusively seen as a
15 separatist act for which Bosanska Krajina would be separated from the
16 rest of the Serb ethnic areas in Bosnia named republic of Serbian people
17 in BiH which would, according to the Sarajevo SDS, jeopardise the unit of
18 the Serbian people in this republic.
19 And there is also a reference to the ARK Assembly of
20 29th February 1992, which is P5452 in this case, during which the idea of
21 the Krajina state was denied and rejected and the RS laws imposed.
22 So, Mr. Jaksic, the fact is that the SDS blocked your idea of the
23 Krajina state because it was against their plans of having Serb state in
24 Bosnia which would encompass all territories claimed as ethnic Serbs;
1 A. That is correct. That was that attempt of ours to establish this
2 autonomous region of the Krajina that was blocked by the SDS. However,
3 the team that worked on this did not have any organised bodies; that is
4 to say, there was no assembly, there were no committees. This was a
5 gathering of intellectuals working on that. And through our actions, we
6 wished to reinforce a belief, politically, and to make sure that the
7 Krajina would not be involved in any trade-offs. You know that there
8 were a countless numbers of variants of the division of Bosnia. Sorry, I
9 know I'm speaking very fast. There were many maps that were drawn and a
10 separation line often went through the Krajina, and it was not only with
11 the SDS but also with the army that we presented these ultimatums saying
12 that they could not trade with the Krajina or, rather, not have the
13 Krajina involved in any trade-offs. And we tried to create institutions
14 and certain documents.
15 I'm going to tell you something now. These --
16 Q. Let's keep a little bit longer on this topic of Krajina state,
17 because your idea of the Krajina state was discussed at the SDS deputies
18 club meeting on 28 February 1992, during which many comments were made
19 about you, about Predrag Lazarevic, and about your idea of the Krajina
21 MR ZEC: If we can have P00938.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask you that we stay
23 with this, if possible. Can we stay with this.
24 MR ZEC:
25 Q. Wait for my question, please. I'm going to show you now what was
1 said during this SDS meeting in February 1992 about --
2 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. --
3 MR ZEC:
4 Q. -- this same idea.
5 MR. ROBINSON: Before we leave this document, we would ask that
6 it be tendered.
7 JUDGE KWON: I think he will come back to this.
8 MR ZEC: I am finished with this exhibit and we can admit. I
9 didn't offer. I thought it's too long. And witness confirmed what I
10 said, but we can admit it.
11 JUDGE KWON: How long was it, then? It disappeared.
12 MR ZEC: The article was, as I remember, in English 12 pages.
13 JUDGE KWON: Why don't we admit the first page in B/C/S and the
14 first and second page in English. And, if necessary, other parts can be
15 added depending upon the re-examination.
16 Yes, shall we assign a number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P6616, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please continue.
19 MR ZEC: Thank you.
20 Can we have English page 34, B/C/S e-court page 50.
21 Q. So, Mr. Jaksic, this is what SDS thought about your idea of the
22 Krajina state. Here is Mr. Karadzic speaking. He said:
23 "Those Lazarevic fellows, those stuffed peacocks to whom we have
24 made no promises because one can't promise them anything, those people to
25 whom we have opened doors, those communists who were serfs in 1945 and
1 participated in the efforts to make Krajina and Banja Luka poor, now they
2 are creeping out of some institutes and trying to be a power above the
4 "The Serbian Democratic Party is in power there!"
5 So this was the view of Mr. Karadzic with respect to you,
6 Mr. Lazarevic, and your idea of the Krajina state; right?
7 A. I'm going to answer and this really can explain a lot in this
8 case. You see, the SDS won the elections in the Krajina. Most of the
9 Serbs there voted for the SDS because they were the most numerous there.
10 When Republika Srpska was created, the Serb Republic of
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina, the leadership of the SDS had to leave Sarajevo and
12 go to Pale. A great intellectual elite of Sarajevo left Sarajevo with
13 them and went to Pale. This is very important.
14 Q. Can I clarify, when you say they left to Pale, what period are
15 you talking about? We are here talking about February 1992.
16 A. This does have to do with February and also what happened
17 beforehand in Banja Luka.
18 Q. [Overlapping speakers]
19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Both speakers are speaking
20 at the same time so it's impossible to interpret into any language.
21 MR ZEC:
22 Q. I'm sorry for interrupting you. I'm trying to keep some way that
23 we can follow your evidence. So we won't go now to period of war and
24 later. Let's keep with this. Let's talk about --
25 JUDGE KWON: Let me see.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have an objection regarding the
3 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
4 Sir, did you complete your answer with respect to this part of
5 Mr. Karadzic's intervention?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not. Please, I would like to
7 say a very important thing.
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Jaksic, if you could speak very slowly.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can. In Banja Luka, leading
10 intellectuals, artists, they all the remained in Banja Luka during the
11 war and after the war. Had they been compelled to leave Banja Luka to go
12 to a smaller place in the Krajina, that would be Knezevo, for example,
13 that is what Pale is to Sarajevo. This movement would have been a lot
14 more compact in the Krajina than it actually had been. This elite that
15 is mentioned by Dr. Karadzic in this transcript, this Banja Luka elite,
16 along with the epithets that you referred to, is equally patriotic but it
17 was not politically organised. And they strove only to preserve the
18 population in the Krajina. That's the only thing that they had in mind.
19 The policy of the SDS was a lot more complex and in a far bigger
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I leave it to you Mr. Zec.
22 Mr. Zec wanted to remind you that this was in February 1992.
23 Please continue, Mr. Zec.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Transcript, please.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In line 18, it was not recorded.
2 The witness was interrupted when he said that a great Serb intellectual
3 elite left Sarajevo and went to Pale. That explains the rest of his
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I think it can be read that way as it is now.
6 But let's continue.
7 MR ZEC: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 Q. In paragraph 12, you discuss the influence of Serb leaders on the
9 Bosnian Krajina. You say that Jovan Raskovic gave the SDS in Krajina
10 stronger foundations than Karadzic. Are you saying that Mr. Raskovic was
11 more influential than Karadzic in the SDS in the Bosnian Krajina?
12 A. I cannot -- well, I think that at first, yes. At first, yes.
13 But that went on for a little while, and then after 1991
14 Professor Raskovic withdrew and then the role of the SDS was dominant
15 with the team that was in Sarajevo.
16 MR. ZEC: Let's have a look at 65 ter 11996, which is an article
17 from January 1991. I'm sorry, the article is from January 1992. At
18 English page 2; B/C/S should be the third column. In the B/C/S, it's
19 third column from second line.
20 Q. And this is what Jovan Raskovic said:
21 "All this can sound some kind of profanity, but I believe that
22 there is no fear of Bosnian sovereignty for the Serbian people in BiH.
23 It would not be a genocide. I talked about that with Karadzic. He's not
24 inclined to accept my opinion" --
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, please. Could the
1 Prosecutor not skip anything once he starts reading. Now that he did
2 start, he should read everything out. I mean, it is unfair to skip two
3 sentences that explain everything.
4 JUDGE KWON: But if you -- first, could you help me find the
5 passage on this page.
6 MR ZEC: So it starts with -- towards the upper part of the page,
7 "... that true politics has not been established ..." That's in English.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
9 MR ZEC: And I skipped that part and I said:
10 "All this can sound some kind of profanity, but, believe me,
11 there is no fear of Bosnian sovereignty for the Serbian people in BiH.
12 This would not be genocide."
13 Then I will skip two lines:
14 "I talked about that with Karadzic. He's not inclined to accept
15 my opinion. He thinks it is necessary to react in a different way if the
16 Bosnian sovereignty is formed. According to him, the Serbs must adopt
17 different political stand and a diverse political procedure in that case,
18 even though it seems to me that it pushes people into a war. He has an
19 excuse so far as to say that they caused it and we are only reacting to
20 it. However, his reaction is without a doubt pro-war one."
21 Q. So here, Mr. Jaksic, they talk about the issue of Bosnian
22 independence. And as we see, Mr. Raskovic was not against Bosnian
23 independence, but Mr. Karadzic insisted that Bosnian Serbs should react
24 against it even if, as Mr. Raskovic says, it pushes people into a war.
25 So it is not correct that Raskovic was more influential in the
1 Bosnian Krajina than Karadzic. In fact, it was Karadzic and his
2 influence which ultimately prevailed in the Bosnian Krajina; right?
3 A. Yes, it did prevail, but Raskovic gave numerous statements. I
4 don't want to cite them here, you probably know them, about both the
5 Serbs and the war. He acted more like a free-thinking lecturer. As far
6 as the population in Krajina is concerned, there was no distinction.
7 According to Karadzic or to Raskovic, people believed it's absolutely the
8 same policy. So we did not feel any conflict, nor were there any
9 factions between Karadzic and Raskovic in Krajina. But what matters is
10 that people with whom I worked had very little contact with Raskovic. In
11 fact, we had no contact with him at all.
12 Q. But you confirm this is Jovan Raskovic that you talk about and
13 the extent to which his views were followed in Bosanska Krajina? This is
14 the same person; right?
15 MR. ROBINSON: Objection, Mr. President. That question, whether
16 this is the same Jovan Raskovic is not -- I don't believe it's going --
17 it's a relevant question because it won't make any difference to the
18 admissibility of this.
19 JUDGE KWON: Probably you can reformulate your question, Mr. Zec.
20 MR ZEC:
21 Q. Mr. Jaksic, when you in your statement talk about Jovan Raskovic
22 and his views and influence on Bosanska Krajina, this was an example of
23 the views you were talking about; right?
24 A. I only said that Professor Raskovic was a charismatic personality
25 and he was present when the first boards in Krajina were established. I
1 don't know if he visited later. He wasn't present there much. After the
2 proclamation of independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina, he didn't go there.
3 He wasn't present all, either physically or politically.
4 MR ZEC: Mr. President, I would offer this article.
5 MR. ROBINSON: Objection, Mr. President. The witness didn't
6 confirm this aspect of Mr. Raskovic's views, and the Prosecution is
7 trying to basically get admitted that Raskovic thought Dr. Karadzic had a
8 pro-war stance, when the witness didn't confirm or comment on that.
9 JUDGE KWON: Did he not confirm to the extent that -- to the
10 extent to agree that Mr. Karadzic's position prevailed at the end of the
12 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, his position but not as described by -- he
13 didn't comment on -- on the aspect of his position described in this
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Zec, would you like to add --
16 MR ZEC: Yeah --
17 JUDGE KWON: -- anything?
18 MR ZEC: -- that was the exact impeachment point, because in the
19 statement it was Mr. Raskovic who gave more foundations or influence in
20 Krajina. And now it contradicts the witness, first; and second, the
21 witness confirmed that this was the case.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber agrees with Mr. Zec. We'll admit this
24 part. Shall we assign a number for this.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P6617 [Realtime transcript read in
1 error "P6670"], Your Honours.
2 MR ZEC:
3 Q. Mr. Jaksic, once the conflict started, the idea of creating Serb
4 areas in Bosnia was implemented by targeting non-Serbs attacking and
5 destroying their towns and places of residence and detaining many.
6 That's what happened; right?
7 A. I was there. These things happened very little [Realtime
8 transcript read in error "late"] in Banja Luka. The president of Banja
9 Luka municipality was Mr. Radic, my associate at the institute, and we
10 did our utmost to prevent some uncontrolled groups to do harm to people.
11 I did not witness any of these things and I don't know much about them.
12 However, at the same time, the 14 members of my closest family including
13 my brothers and sisters --
14 Q. So -- and the fact was that an ethnically clean Serb area was
15 created; right?
16 A. No, I don't think it's a fact.
17 MR ZEC: Could we have --
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Transcript.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Line 11, the witness said: Very
21 few of these things happened in Banja Luka, or these things happened very
22 little, not very late.
23 JUDGE KWON: What I heard is "very little."
24 MR ZEC: Thank you.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But what is written is "very late."
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I confirm that.
2 Yes, shall we continue.
3 MR ZEC: Thank you, Mr. President. Can we have 65 ter 40606C,
4 which is a video-clip.
5 Q. And Mr. Jaksic, you will see a video-clip from a TV talk show
6 where you; Drago Ljubicic from Doboj; and Pero Markovic, from Brcko, talk
7 about the peace plan proposal. There is no date, it could be 1994 or
8 1995, but perhaps you will be able to tell us the date.
9 MR ZEC: And, Mr. President, transcripts were provided to the
10 translators so they can translate.
11 [Video-clip played]
12 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "But an even more important point is
13 that really not a single part of Republika Srpska could be found to be
14 returned or to be given to us. I take the expression which would really
15 be a gift to the other side. Not a single area could be found that is
16 not an ethnically clean Serb area. Even if there was no fighting and if
17 so many people did not die for it, to do that would be a sin. But I
18 think that the percentage leads to the following, and I'm warning that
19 that should more or less lead to the following, that's what's being
20 reckoned with, people from Krajina will not given in -- will not give up
21 Krajina. They have an argument. People from Posavina will not give up
22 Posavina. People from Semberija will not give up Semberija. Those in
23 Birac will not give up Birac. Herzegovinians and people from Romanija
24 will not give ..."
25 MR ZEC:
1 Q. Mr. Jaksic, did you recognise yourself, Drago Ljubicic, and
2 Pero Markovic on this clip?
3 A. Of course I recognised myself, and I have almost forgotten these
4 other people.
5 Q. Are you able to tell us when this was?
6 A. I believe that was towards the end of 1994. At that time
7 Republika Srpska had about 72 per cent of the territory of
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and in the Owen-Stoltenberg Plan, divisions had
9 already been planned and discussed in percentages, and we were aware that
10 we could not keep 72 per cent of the territory. And there was a lot of
11 talk about where we could make a concession, in which area, and then
12 there occurred a rift between both politicians and regions, each of them
13 calculating which part of which area it could be. And that was the
14 discussion in this show.
15 Q. And you said:
16 "Not a single area could be found that is not ethnically clean
17 Serb area."
18 At this point in time you were aware of this -- of the results of
19 campaigns to forcibly remove non-Serbs from large areas of
20 Republika Srpska; right?
21 A. No, that's not right. I had analyses, and I published them in a
22 book which you have in your possession. The area where Serbs are 92
23 per cent of the population covers 52 per cent of the area of Bosnia and
24 Herzegovina. It was very difficult, therefore, to find areas where we
25 could make concessions without giving up ethnically pure Serb areas.
1 Q. Let's see one more clip from this same discussion with respect to
2 one of these areas.
3 MR ZEC: That is Pero Markovic discussing the area of Brcko. And
4 we also provided transcript of this clip. It is 65 ter 40406A.
5 [Video-clip played]
6 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "As for the people who live in Brcko
7 and Posavina, I think the situation is the same. If you remember, Brcko
8 was being divided up to the railroad, up to Brka river, this way, that
9 way. We are sure that Brcko will not and must not be divided, that Brcko
10 will remain Serbian and that it will serve as a connection between
11 Krajinas and motherland Serbia; and that Interplet socks, Bimal oil,
12 Bimeks ham, et cetera, will continue to be sold in Serbian lands. That
13 is to say that we will serve as a connection between Serbian lands in
14 proportion to the future size, and I sincerely hope that they will become
15 as big as we all want them to be."
16 MR ZEC:
17 Q. Mr. Jaksic, Brcko was one of these areas which you refer the
18 ethnically clean areas in Republika Srpska; right?
19 A. I was not aware of that. I found out only after the war, after
20 peace was made. I didn't have any information in Banja Luka concerning
21 Brcko at that time.
22 MR ZEC: Your Honours, I would tender these two clips and I don't
23 have any further questions.
24 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit them both.
25 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 40606C will be Exhibit P6618. And
1 65 ter 40606A will be Exhibit P6619.
2 JUDGE KWON: Do you have any re-examination?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, your Excellency.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please proceed.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
7 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, questions were put to you about the
8 union of municipalities. At that time, did we introduce something
9 completely new and violate the law or the constitution by creating this
10 union of municipalities? How did things stand from the legal point of
12 A. As far as I know, unions of municipalities existed even before
13 the war. However, they had very little purpose. Certain laws were
14 amended a bit or supplemented to enable life to go on properly. But no
15 new legislation was imposed, especially not laws that would discriminate
16 against certain groups or areas.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown P4743.
18 And I ask the witness once again to speak more slowly. P4743. This is
19 the SFRY constitution from 1974. Could we see the Serbian page 22 and 53
20 in English. Could we zoom in on the lower part of page 119 -- Article
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Please, Professor, I'll read out. Everybody can see. It says
24 that communities shall co-operate with one another voluntarily and on
25 principles of solidarity. They shall pull resources and form joint
1 bodies, organisations, and services for the conduct of affairs of common
2 interest and the satisfaction of common needs, and may associate in urban
3 and regional communities. Now, what was going on in Krajina? Was it
4 within the framework of this article?
5 A. Precisely. This article was used when this union of
6 municipalities was established because we had no other legal foundation
7 for it. Although we had other areas and other regions, the only legal
8 foundation was this article of the law.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This article straddles the next
11 page, but this was already exhibited as a Prosecution number, so I won't
12 waste time on it.
13 JUDGE KWON: I just wanted to note that the English is not a
14 translation of the B/C/S version. This --
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The version in B/C/S straddles the
16 next page. Maybe we could see the next page --
17 JUDGE KWON: No --
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- in the left top corner.
19 JUDGE KWON: What I wanted to say is that the B/C/S is the
20 original and the English version is coming from a separate collection.
21 So I noted the distinction between "may" and "shall." I heard the
22 translation "shall," but it is -- it's "may" in English version. I think
23 if we see the cover page, it's a compilation of various constitution of
24 various countries in the world, so I take it it's not the original
25 translation of this original version. With that caveat, we'll continue.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. We'll have it
2 translated. But "shall" is more appropriate, "shall co-operate
3 voluntarily." And as for association, it says "may associate," or "may
4 join," and "may associate in urban and regional communities."
5 JUDGE KWON: For clarity, I would like to request the CLSS to
6 translate this Article 119.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And there is some text on the next
8 page, so the end of this article is on the next page, so I draw your
9 attention to these two pages.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Now, Professor, you have been shown an interview with late
12 Professor Raskovic which is now admitted as P6670.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see that document, please.
14 Prosecution Exhibit 6670.
15 JUDGE KWON: Probably 17. We haven't reached that number, 70.
16 MR ZEC: 11996, 65 ter that I had.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In line 5 on page 62, it is marked
18 that the exhibit is P6670.
19 JUDGE KWON: Passage where you are referred to as "pro-war."
20 Yes, 6617.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Then on page 62, line 5, it needs
22 to be corrected.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in on the middle
25 paragraph; that is to say, the third from the right. One to the left --
1 right. One more to the left. One more, I'm sorry. Good.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Professor, here esteemed Prosecutor Zec skipped a passage. It
4 says, "All this may" --
5 JUDGE KWON: Probably next page for the English, yes.
6 Yes, please, continue.
7 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. "All this may sound as some sort of blasphemy but I believe that
9 the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina should not fear Bosnian
10 sovereignty. It would not be genocidal. Perhaps it would not be
11 'Serbophile,' and it would be 'Serbophobe' but it would not be
12 'Serbocide." That's what I discussed with Dr. Karadzic. He is not
13 inclined to accept my opinion."
14 Please, Professor, tell us, first of all, were there any
15 indications that that kind of Bosnia would be Serbophobe, and would the
16 Serbian people accept that regardless of what I might have recommended?
17 A. A large part of my statement which I signed and which we
18 discussed is based on the fact that in Krajina there were no rifts
19 between the lines advocated by you on the one hand and Raskovic on the
20 other. After the referendum, it was widely believed that Serbs in Bosnia
21 would not be equal with others. And separation from Yugoslavia was
22 absolutely unacceptable to the population. There was even a conviction
23 that you are even too tolerant and too inclined to believe them more than
24 the people were. I now claim that your position was not hard-line. On
25 the contrary, they were softer and more tolerant concerning the
1 Serbophobia that the people were expecting.
2 Q. In the question, line 12, what's missing is the following: Did
3 the policy that was afoot in Bosnia give us reason to view it as
4 Serbophobe, and would people accept it even if I had advised them to
5 accept a unitarian Bosnia? The answer is recorded but I just wanted the
6 question to be complete.
7 A. The people would not have accepted it even if you had advised
8 them to. The people in Krajina certainly wouldn't.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 JUDGE KWON: Do you have further? Shall we continue after a
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, your Excellency.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll have a break for 45 minutes and resume at
14 17 past 1.00.
15 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.35 p.m.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 [The witness takes the stand]
18 --- On resuming at 1.22 p.m.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic. Please continue.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Professor, while we're looking at this document that we have
23 before us, in view of the fact that you were familiar with Yugoslav
24 constitution and laws, were we duty-bound to accept a unilaterally
25 seceding independent BH which would have been Serbophobe as Dr. Raskovic
1 put it?
2 A. I don't think that the constitution of Yugoslavia defined any
3 such scenarios of the breakup of the country unfolding in this way.
4 However, I am quite certain about the fact about the way in which
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina declared its independence was unacceptable to the
6 population in Bosnia-Herzegovina, or shall I say in Krajina. We must be
7 aware of the fact that in Jajce and Bihac, in Krajina therefore, this is
8 where Yugoslavia was born because this is where the thrust of the
9 liberation war took place. The population of the area did not
10 contemplate the idea of leaving Yugoslavia at all. It wasn't necessary
11 to mobilise the population in any way in order to resist this process of
12 declaring Bosnia-Herzegovina independent. And the Serbian people,
13 regardless of whether a referendum would have been held, would never
14 accept that.
15 Q. And thank you. This is my last question. The TV talk show we
16 were looking at where you talk about the territories being restored
17 within the Owen-Stoltenberg Plan, Professor, was it your position and
18 were you saying there that purely Serb territories would have to be
19 restored and in that sense were you talking about the territories that
20 were purely Serb before the war or the territories that we took under our
21 control in the course of the war?
22 MR ZEC: Leading.
23 JUDGE KWON: Indeed.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Can you tell us what you meant when you said that territories
2 from Semberija, from here and there, that they would have to be restored
3 and that they would have to be purely Serb?
4 A. Well, there were several plans for the partition of Bosnia, from
5 the Cutileiro Plan, to the Owen-Stoltenberg Plan, and we were all engaged
6 on the matter. We all contemplated the territories that should fall to
7 us under these plans. Of course, there were quite a few calculating
8 positions that were being planted, bandied about, even within Republika
9 Srpska. So we knew that we would be compelled to give up on some of the
10 territories in order to end up with compact territory. In that context,
11 we were apprehensive of the fact, and this is something that turned out
12 to be true under the Dayton Accords, we were apprehensive of the fact
13 that we would have to give up on purely Serb territories. It was never
14 our position that we should count on the territories that were conquered
15 in any way. Ultimately, it had to do with part of the Herzegovina,
16 western Bosnia, Drvar, Glamoc. All these territories ultimately ended up
17 in the federation. What we had in mind were the territories where over
18 90 per cent of the population was Serbs and they were the periphery of
19 what was the then layout of Republika Srpska.
20 Q. When we say "purely Serb," this means "indubitably Serb." Was
21 Banja Luka purely Serb during the war?
22 A. Not during the war it wasn't. The records reflecting the various
23 percentages was not something that we were able to have. In my
24 institute, people kept on working until 1994. However, there were waves
25 of people moving out in the outlying areas, and this led to a psychosis
1 where people grouped, where people left. But never during the war did we
2 contemplate this, and the majority of us were in fact afraid of being
3 ethnically pure.
4 Q. When you say you didn't contemplate this, you didn't treat them,
5 who is "we," and how were the Muslims leaving Banja Luka treated? Were
6 they driven out?
7 A. Well, I know that there were people who left the institute and
8 they were weeping. We didn't sack them. They simply left of their own
9 accord. Were they organised by someone? Did they have to leave? I
10 don't know. But I know quite a few people. I know people who came to
11 see me at home who told me, I don't have the intention of leaving but a
12 group was getting organised and advising me to join them and pack up our
13 things. So many people were involved and we weren't quite clear on what
14 the motivations were. Perhaps there was pressure exerted on some, but in
15 many cases I think it was the case of departures that were organised and
17 Q. And who initiated these departures? Was it the authorities or
18 they themselves?
19 A. Well, I don't know that. Not the local authorities, no.
20 President Radic, in fact, was confronted with a great deal of problems.
21 He was often said to be the man who failed to respond to allegations that
22 Serbs in some other areas were being driven out, and he was often
23 reproached for being too tolerant. Our view was that we should not give
24 into such statements and that we should not facilitate or in any way
25 assist this process of people moving out of the area.
1 Q. Thank you. I have no further questions.
2 JUDGE KWON: Well, then that concludes your evidence, Mr. Jaksic.
3 On behalf of the Chamber, I would like to thank you for your coming to
4 The Hague to give it. You are now free to go. Please have a safe
5 journey back home.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 JUDGE KWON: So next witness is Mr. Jovo Kevac.
9 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct, Mr. President.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 JUDGE KWON: Would the witness make the solemn declaration.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
13 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
14 WITNESS: JOVO KEVAC
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Kevac. Please be seated and make
17 yourself comfortable.
18 Yes. Before you commence your evidence, Mr. Kevac, I must draw
19 your attention to a certain rule that we have here at this international
20 Tribunal; that is, Rule 90(E). Under this rule, you may object to
21 answering any question from Mr. Karadzic, the Prosecutor, or even from
22 the Judges if you believe that your answer might incriminate you in a
23 criminal offence. In this context, "incriminate" means saying something
24 that might amount to an admission of your guilt in a criminal offence, or
25 saying something that might provide evidence that you might have
1 committed a criminal offence. However, should you think that an answer
2 might incriminate you and as a consequence you refuse to answer the
3 question, I must let you know that the Tribunal has the power to compel
4 you to answer the question. But in that situation, the Tribunal would
5 ensure that your testimony compelled under such circumstances would not
6 be used in any case that might be laid against you for any offence save
7 and except the offence of giving false testimony. Do you understand
8 that, Mr. Kevac?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
11 Yes, Mr. Karadzic. Please proceed.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Kevac.
15 A. Good afternoon, Mr. President.
16 Q. This was a bit too fast. Please let's make a pause and make sure
17 that we speak slowly so that everything may be reflected in the
18 transcript without resorting to the need to repeat things.
19 Mr. Kevac, have you given a statement to my Defence team?
20 A. Yes.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May the witness be shown 1D49065.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. While we are waiting, Jovo is short for Jovan; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Please look at the left-hand side. Is this the first page of
1 your statement?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you. Have you read the statement and signed it?
4 A. Yes.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the last page be shown so that
6 the witness may identify the signature.
7 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Is this your signature?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you. Does the statement accurately reflect what you told
11 the Defence team?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. If I were to put the same questions to you here today
14 in the courtroom, would your answers essentially be the same?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I tender this statement into
18 evidence under Rule 92 ter.
19 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, Ms. Edgerton. Do you have any
21 MS. EDGERTON: Good afternoon, and no.
22 JUDGE KWON: We'll receive it.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D4268, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I will now read a short
1 summary of the statement in English, the statement by Mr. Jovo Kevac.
2 [In English] Jovo Kevac was elected to the
3 Kljuc Municipal Assembly in 1990. In 1992, he was mobilised in the JNA
4 and assigned to the war unit 820, the Banja Luka training centre.
5 The Kljuc Municipal Assembly had an absolute majority of SDS
6 members. The assembly continued to operate normally until the events in
7 Croatia and Slovenia, after which concern spread among all citizens.
8 When the first incident occurred, the Muslim leaders had already formed
9 their own Stari Grad municipality and their own BH Territorial Defence.
10 A particularly serious incident occurred when Muslim extremists set up an
11 ambush on the road between Velagici and Pudin Han and attacked a column
12 of young, unarmed soldiers on regular military service in the JNA. On
13 this occasion, six soldiers were killed and about twenty wounded.
14 As it became clear from numerous attacks, the Muslim extremists
15 were preparing for war with the Serbs in Kljuc. This is also confirmed
16 by the fact that the Muslims moved a large number of Muslim civilians
17 from the area of Velagici along to Slovenia, Croatia, and other European
18 countries before the first incident. During and after these events, the
19 situation was chaotic: Roads and telecommunications were cut, there were
20 disruptions to the water-supply, shortage of medicine, food, and fuel,
21 and there was no electricity. The safety of every citizen was
22 compromised regardless of affiliation or ethnicity, since individuals and
23 groups were roaming around and seeking personal and financial benefits.
24 The chaos in Kljuc lasted until the establishment of political
25 authorities and of VRS and civilian police. They immediately ordered
1 that a system be created to ensure the safety and protection of all
2 citizens of Kljuc and the political leadership offered co-existence to
3 everyone. Many Muslims remained in Kljuc in 1992-1993 and some joined
4 the civilian structures.
5 After the first incident in Kljuc municipality, panic and chaos
6 took hold and all those who had relatives or friends somewhere abroad
7 tried to leave. It was not only Muslims and Croats who did so, but also
8 Serbs. The SDS and the military authorities of Kljuc municipality never
9 planned or ordered the ethnic cleansing of the municipality. All
10 citizens who did not participate in combat operations and attacks on
11 Serbs were allowed to stay.
12 On 28th of May, 1992, the leadership of Kljuc municipality
13 appealed to everyone in possession of illegal weapons to hand them over
14 to the legal organs of the civilian police in order to avoid untoward
15 incidents. The Muslims who did not want to hand in their weapons ran
16 away and tried to join the Muslim forces on the territory outside Kljuc.
17 After the ultimatum, those who were found in possession of illegal arms
18 were taken to the Secretariat of the Interior, SUP, office to be
19 interrogated. Mr. Kevac is not aware of any beating that occurred during
20 and outside these investigations.
21 On 10th of July, 1992, Bosnian Muslim men and women were killed
22 at the school building of the Biljani hamlet. This heinous crime was
23 committed by individuals who got out of control. They were arrested and
24 handed over to the prosecution authorities in Banja Luka.
25 And that is summary. At that moment, I do not have questions for
1 Mr. Kevac.
2 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
3 Mr. Kevac, as you have noted, your evidence in chief in this case
4 has been admitted in writing; that is, through your written witness
5 statement in lieu of your oral testimony. Now, you'll be cross-examined
6 by the representative of the Office of the Prosecutor.
7 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
9 Cross-examination by Ms. Edgerton:
10 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Kevac.
11 A. Good afternoon, Madam Prosecutor.
12 Q. I'd like to begin your cross-examination by going straight to a
14 MS. EDGERTON: It's 65 ter number 09225, please.
15 Q. Right. This document, Mr. Kevac, is a report dated
16 July 13, 1992, from the security organ of the 30th Krajina Division, and,
17 Mr. Kevac, it's responding to a Main Staff query dated the same day, and
18 the query was about paramilitary and other units in the division's area
19 of responsibility.
20 MS. EDGERTON: And I'd like us to go over in both languages to
21 page 3, please, in English and in B/C/S.
22 Q. Now, Mr. Kevac, have a look at that paragraph that's at the top
23 of the page in your language, while we'll have a look at the same
24 paragraph that's in the middle of the page in English. And it says:
25 "The revival of the Chetnik movement is present in the area of
1 the Kljuc municipality and the promoters there are the SDS
2 President Veljko Kondic, a close relative of Vinko Kondic, from the Kljuc
3 SSJB 'Vojvoda' Jovo Kevac, reserve captain 1st class, is a member of the
4 units formed on that territory. In the end of April, Kevac provoked a
5 rebellion in the education centre of Stricici and prevented the sending
6 of 117 scripts and officers to a war unit of the 1st Krajina Corps. On
7 his return to the territory of Kljuc, the political leadership appointed
8 him a company commander and later on he was transferred to the position
9 of battalion commander in that area."
10 That's you; right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And whatever this document says, you were integrated into the
13 VRS; right? You were -- not only as a company commander, a battalion
14 commander, but for a period of time you even served as a brigade
15 commander in the VRS; right?
16 A. I was not a brigade commander.
17 Q. All right. But in terms of your positions and ranks, the
18 document's correct. You were a company commander and you were a
19 battalion commander; right?
20 A. I was a -- I was the commander of a company as it was being set
21 up, and likewise the battalion commander. It was only at the end of
22 August that the battalion was in fact formed and that I was appointed its
24 Q. All right. Now your statement doesn't say a word about any of
25 that; right? It doesn't have a word about your military service. All it
1 says is that -- in fact, if I hadn't have asked you anything else, we
2 would all have understood that you spent your service in the training
3 centre in Banja Luka, because that's all your statement says; right?
4 A. I did say that we returned to the municipality as the
5 820th Training Centre was disbanded. As an experienced officer, with
6 previous experience of work at the TO Staff, at this point in time when
7 it was not possible to gain access to the records of conscripts, I was
8 taken on because of my experience to gather the units that would come
9 under the 17th Kljuc Brigade. And that's why, as you say, I was company
10 commander and battalion commander. I didn't think it necessary to
11 describe my entire warpath. But if necessary, I can describe for you the
12 various places where I was deployed to during the war and the posts I was
13 appointed to.
14 Q. Well, we'll get to that. But, Mr. Kevac, your statement doesn't
15 even say that you returned to the municipality as the
16 820th Training Center was disbanded. It says absolutely nothing about
17 your military service record; right?
18 A. I'm sorry if that's the way it is, but right now I cannot
19 remember what it was that I wrote. But I believe that that was so.
20 However, not with the intention of avoiding anything.
21 Q. Well, you say now that you omitted that significant period of
22 time of service, not with the intention of avoiding anything, but,
23 Mr. Kevac, that period of service -- in that period of service, you were
24 a member and you were a commander of units who were involved in crimes
25 against non-Serbs in Prhovo, in Peci, in Velagici, and Biljani.
1 Mr. Kevac, what I'd like to put to you is that you deliberately -- you
2 deliberately hid your military service record because you had a personal
3 interest in doing so. You wanted to avoid criminal investigation. Isn't
4 that the case?
5 A. No, no, Madam Prosecutor, that is not the case. No intention
6 whatsoever. And all the things that you enumerated, namely, that the
7 non-Serb population was killed at these locations, that is not correct.
8 The only thing that may have happened was the village of Biljani, where I
9 tried, as briefly as possible, to explain how come that happened. As for
10 all the rest that you enumerated previously, I was not there at all, and
11 that was not something that my unit did and it was not their line of
12 work, either.
13 Q. Well, Mr. Kevac, your fellow soldiers, including Marko Adamovic,
14 and your company commander, your subordinate company commander,
15 Marko Samardzija, have both been convicted of crimes arising from the
16 actions of your military forces at these locations, Marko Samardzija, in
17 particular, for his in the events at Biljani on the 10th of July. So,
18 Mr. Kevac, it's not the truth that guided you in making this statement.
19 As I said, it was your direct personal interest in avoiding
20 investigation, isn't it? Otherwise, without my questioning right now we
21 would never have known what you were doing; right?
22 A. First of all, I would kindly ask you not to use that expression,
23 that I am saying something that is not true. I am telling the truth.
24 Marko Adamovic and the units that you enumerated were never subordinated
25 to me. Marko Adamovic was subordinated to me at the Territorial Defence
1 Staff in peacetime. He was one of my desk officers. In wartime, no.
2 Marko Samardzija was also a company commander, a commander of a company
3 that was being established because he hailed from that village. If you
4 allow me, I can give an explanation.
5 The unit was not in barracks. The units were at home. I mean,
6 the personnel, the members of these units. There were lists that we
7 managed to complete. Marko worked on the establishment of that unit, and
8 after that he was not commander of that unit. So there is no wish or
9 intention on our part to conceal anything here. But, please, I kindly
10 ask you, if possible, to refrain from saying that I am not telling the
11 truth. Rest assured that I am telling the truth, and it is my wish to
12 clarify all of these matters, as a matter of fact. Thank you.
13 Q. So you're telling the truth now, but you were hiding the truth
14 when you signed that statement. That's what you're telling us.
15 A. Oh, please. Why did you not put a question to me in terms of
16 speaking about my statement. I thought that this was sufficient.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness repeat
18 his second sentence.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Had you put the questions that you
20 were supposed to put to me, believe me, I would have provided an
21 extensive answer.
22 MS. EDGERTON:
23 Q. Mr. Kevac, the interpreters are concerned that they might have
24 missed your second sentence or your sentence after you responded:
25 "Why did you not put a question to me in terms of speaking about
1 my statement."
2 What did you say after that? What we have here is that you said
3 that you thought that this was sufficient. Do you confirm that's what
4 you said?
5 A. Yes. Yes. I thought that that was sufficient. But before that,
6 I also said that I would have given an extensive explanation about my
7 movements. I thought that was the question. I thought that that was
8 sufficient. I made myself available.
9 Q. Let's have a look --
10 MS. EDGERTON: Before I move on, could I have the first document,
11 65 ter number 09225, tendered as a Prosecution exhibit, please.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll receive it.
13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P6620, Your Honours.
14 MS. EDGERTON:
15 Q. Let's go on to another document.
16 MS. EDGERTON: That's P3366, please.
17 I just need to check that I have the right 65 ter number. That's
18 good. We have the correct documents in front of us now.
19 Q. Have a look at this one, Mr. Kevac. This is an Official Note
20 dated July 10, 1992, and it's prepared by the commander of the Sanica
21 public security station. And it's about the moping up in Sanica by the
22 military organs or the battalion of Commander Jovo Kevac. That's you
23 again; right?
24 A. That is me, but I repeat to you yet again that in that period I
25 was not commander. Rather, I was carrying out the replenishment of the
1 battalion and training the commander of that battalion. I became
2 commander of that battalion on the basis of an official order in the
3 month of August.
4 Q. Regardless of whatever title you're now saying that you might
5 have held at the time of the action in Biljani, it's clear that this
6 document is referring to you, isn't it?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. This document says that the commander of the police station in
9 Sanica was informed by you that the next day your units would undertake a
10 moping-up operation in the terrain in Biljani. It says that the job of
11 the police was to take over the military prisoners, to put them in the
12 school in Biljani, and that they got help from the mobile intervention
13 unit of the Kljuc SJB. It says that the action at Biljani happened in
14 constant communication with the military and that it was the military who
15 sent two buses from Kljuc to take the prisoners there. So this document
16 says you were the commander of a co-ordinated operation that ended with
17 the killing of more than 100 unarmed men, Mr. Kevac. Isn't that true?
18 A. These words of yours really give rise to something that I have to
19 put this way: This term, "moping up the terrain," or rather, "cleansing
20 the terrain," is not used in military terminology. It was mostly used by
21 policemen believing that that is a search of the wider area. In this
22 case --
23 Q. Mr. Kevac, Mr. Kevac, I didn't ask you about that. My question
24 was that --
25 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, I think he was being
1 responsive to her question. She should give him a chance to answer.
2 JUDGE KWON: I am not sure he was answering the question.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I, Excellency. I think that
4 the Prosecution's question suggested cleansing.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll hear him from the meaning of "moping up"
6 and then proceed.
7 Yes, please continue.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Are you addressing me now?
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please continue.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I repeat once again:
11 "Ciscenje terena" is not military terminology. It was used in the
12 police. I meant searching the broader area. Now, why did this commander
13 use that term? I don't know. Probably because in their own
14 communications they use the term several times because this term was used
15 in peacetime as well. The task of this unit, as mentioned here, was to
16 have the Muslim population, the men, gathered in a single place and this
17 was being said to people from one home to another. Members of the unit
18 went around saying that. But then these people were at their homes all
19 the time. They were carrying out their regular duties, standing guard
20 duty at night and also they had reinforced patrols. So this unit was
21 involved in the following way: These men were brought together and the
22 security services, military and civilian, were supposed to deal with
23 persons who were of security interest.
24 Now an explanation: Persons who did not hand over illegal
25 weapons, persons who were marked as incident prone, and also when that
1 would be completed people would go home, except for those persons who
2 were supposed to be investigated. This was not a single case only. It
3 would also happen in the territory of the municipality where there were
4 absolutely no incidents whatsoever. Persons of security interest would
5 be singled out and the rest would be sent to their homes.
6 Now, why did this happen? We'll probably discuss that a bit
7 more. I kindly ask you, though, to understand, to the extent you can for
8 the sake of the truth, what the times were like and what the conditions
9 were like.
10 MS. EDGERTON:
11 Q. Now, if I may, I'd like to get back to my question. My question
12 was about what this document says. My question was: This document says
13 that you were the commander of a co-ordinated operation that ended with
14 the killing of more than 100 men. You were the commander; right?
15 A. I repeat for the third time: No, I was not commander. Another
16 explanation, now. As for the relationship with the civilian authorities,
17 that is to say, this military unit with the civilian authorities --
18 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Kevac.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- this was dealt with by --
20 JUDGE KWON: The question has nothing to do with the co-operation
21 with the police. Wait for the next question.
22 Please continue, Ms. Edgerton.
23 MS. EDGERTON:
24 Q. So are you saying that this document which says on its face --
25 which refers on its face to you about the moping-up action in Sanica by
1 military organs or the battalion of the commander Jovan Kevac is wrong?
2 You were the 2nd Battalion commander, weren't you? You were in charge.
3 A. Let's deal with it this way. This document is written in a
4 grotesque way. I am saying this in linguistic and logical terms. I am
5 stating to you for sure that I was not the responsible person and that I
6 was not the commander of the unit at the time. Quite simply, I was an
7 officer whose task was to establish the battalion in these impossible
8 conditions, if I can put it that way, and to train the command that had
9 been manned with inappropriate military specialties. So that's it. I
10 really don't see what it is that you want me to add to this.
11 Q. So you completely hid your military service record from all of us
12 in the first place. And now that I confront you with it and now that I
13 confront you with a document that puts you in command of an operation
14 that resulted in the killing of more than a hundred men, you say the
15 document is wrong, that it's a lie. You're just trying to avoid
16 investigation, Mr. Kevac. That's why you didn't tell us about it in the
17 first place; right?
18 A. You're going back to my answer to the question that I have
19 already answered. I have no reason to hide my movements during the war,
20 but these insinuations, these things that you are trying to pin on me,
21 that cannot relate to this. And I repeat to you once again: This is not
22 a wrongful report. This is a grotesque report. That's a difference that
23 can be stated in our language. Or how do I clarify this? It's just
24 clumsy. It's worded in a clumsy way without any kind of ill intentions.
25 Now, why would one not believe me? After all, I took an oath a moment
1 ago stating that I would tell the truth, and this is the truth,
2 100 per cent.
3 Q. Well, let's go to the evidence of somebody else who took an oath
4 in front of another Chamber of this Tribunal.
5 MS. EDGERTON: 65 ter number 25953.
6 Q. And it's the evidence of a witness who testified in the
7 prosecution of General Mladic. Her name was Ms. Birte Weiss, and she's
8 an experienced journalist with more than 25 years of service in the
9 Danish cabinet who went back to journalism. And she testified in front
10 of the Judges in the trial of General Mladic about her conversations with
11 Marko Samardzija in relation to the killings at Biljani on the
12 10th of July, 1992. And you see the page in front of you of her
13 testimony. And she wrote a book that talked about the events in Kljuc
14 and Biljani, and she said in respect of the events of 10 July 1992
15 Samardzija told her that he called the Commander-in-Chief and told him
16 what was about to happen in Biljani. Shove off. Go home, he just said.
17 That was at 9.00 a.m. and there were as yet no dead on the road, all
18 those terrible things that he first heard about later.
19 And then I don't know if the second page of this has been
20 uploaded, so I'll just read it otherwise. And then Mrs. Weiss was asked:
21 "Did Marko Samardzija tell you who he called? Did he
22 specifically give the name of who he called?"
23 And she answered:
24 "He mentioned that he contacted the people he could get in touch
25 with. He created the impression that he -- both on the spot, that he
1 objected on the spot, and he mentioned the name Jovo Kevac. And in
2 addition, by telephone he contacted several people whom he wanted to tell
3 what was going on in Biljani in those hours."
4 And then she was asked again -- and I'm reading this to you in
5 case you don't understand English. She was asked again:
6 "And did he tell you who those several people were or what office
7 they occupied?"
8 And she answered:
9 "He said that they were the commanding people."
10 So you told us that you weren't the responsible person but
11 Mrs. Weiss told us that Samardzija said that's exactly who you were. You
12 were one of the commanders, Mr. Kevac.
13 MS. EDGERTON: And that's, for the record, Mladic transcript
14 pages 5303 to 5304.
15 Q. And, Mr. Kevac, I'll show you something else and then I'll ask
16 you a question. She's not the only one. In his own trial in front of
17 the state court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr. Samardzija gave evidence.
18 And he was convicted on appeal to custodial time for the crimes -- for
19 crimes relating to the events in Biljani.
20 MS. EDGERTON: If we could have a look at 65 ter number 25898,
21 just in case you want to see it.
22 Q. But I can read it to you as well. That's a copy of the appellate
23 decision in the case of --
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Would it be possible -- would it be
25 possible to have shorter questions? Please, I'm afraid that we're going
1 to turn the questions into a salad, and then the answers are going to be
3 JUDGE KWON: It's up to the Chamber. The Chamber will monitor
4 the appropriateness of questions.
5 Please continue, Ms. Edgerton.
6 MS. EDGERTON:
7 Q. At page 30 of this decision, and I'm going to see if I can try
8 quickly to find the B/C/S citation, I might have omitted to do it, but,
9 in any case, it's English page 30. The appellate court referred to
10 Samardzija's evidence in his own Defence, and Samardzija said at Biljani,
11 seeing the civilians loaded on the buses, he contacted you and told you
12 something strange was happening. He told you he needed further
13 instructions. He referred to you by name.
14 My question to you is: Given this evidence --
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could that part at least be shown
16 to the witness in Serbian?
17 MS. EDGERTON: I can do it in a few minutes, Dr. Karadzic, and --
18 because I don't want to --
19 JUDGE KWON: No, it's important to show it.
20 MS. EDGERTON: I accept that, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Could I have your indulgence, then, for a moment?
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Because I didn't bring a B/C/S hard copy with me,
25 so it will take me a couple of minutes. And my apologies.
1 Your Honour, my sincere apologies at this. Would Your Honours
2 indulge me with a few short minutes of recess rather than wasting
3 anyone's time? And it would be very brief for us to find this -- oh, my
4 colleagues in the Registry who are able to read the language have been
5 able to save the day, Your Honours.
6 Q. And, Mr. Kevac, the citation I was referring to is in the first
7 full paragraph, the large portion, the large full paragraph at the top of
8 the page in front of you about halfway through that paragraph. And the
9 exact citation says:
10 "The testimony of the witnesses Slavko Strbac and Drago Banjac
11 confirms the defence of the accused that he made a contact with his
12 superior Jovo Kevac, the brigade commander, and that on that occasion he
13 said something strange was happening and that he needed further
15 MS. EDGERTON: And my thanks to my colleagues, my sincere thanks.
16 Q. Mr. Kevac, what I'd like to put to you is: You were in charge.
17 You knew about the crimes. You knew about them at the time they were
18 happening. You're only -- what you're doing, actually, is only trying to
19 create doubt now about this incident because it's in your personal
20 interest to do so. Isn't that the case?
21 A. No. And, please, with these questions that are finally to your
22 benefit, you are not maintaining the dignity of the Prosecution. The
23 answer to this question is no. And I will give an explanation to each
24 and every question, if it is the right question, but I really do not
25 appreciate these insinuations.
1 Q. Just to stay --
2 MS. EDGERTON: Your indulgence.
3 JUDGE KWON: But the reference to Jovan Kavac in this document,
4 does it refer to you, Mr. Kevac?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Because Jovo and Jovan is
6 approximately the same in our language. It's very common.
7 JUDGE KWON: But it says "Kavac" not "Kevac." It's a
8 misspelling. It's a typo.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, a typo.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 MS. EDGERTON:
12 Q. So despite what Mr. Samardzija said under oath in his own trial,
13 despite what Ms. Weiss said under oath before this Tribunal, you maintain
14 that you were not the responsible person in respect of the events in
15 Biljani; is that correct?
16 A. Yes. But you are not letting me explain how that communication
17 went. It would be clearer to both you and the Court. The communications
18 were down in the entire territory of Kljuc. The only connection --
19 Q. [Overlapping speakers]
20 A. -- that existed with the local commune Sanica was through radio
21 sets that had a limited range, and then an interim radio station had to
22 be established. One of these interim stations was at the top of a hill
23 called Biljani. All communications were by radio.
24 Q. Mr. Kevac --
25 A. The first contact with Samardzija --
1 Q. Mr. Kevac --
2 JUDGE KWON: Let's just let him --
3 MS. EDGERTON: Fine.
4 JUDGE KWON: Let's just hear him out.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first communication between
6 this radio was between Marko Samardzija and assistant commander for
7 legal, moral guidance, and legal affairs. The assignment of the unit of
8 which Marko Samardzija was a member was, after gathering Muslim men and
9 after the security people arrived, to let them go home. I repeated that
10 to Marko, as far as I remember.
11 So there was no contact in which I was asked what to do because
12 that had already been communicated to these people. And there is no
13 reason for this kind of communication not to be understood as it really
14 went because the entire civilian and military life operated through these
15 three radio stations.
16 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President.
17 Mr. President, I have a request that the remainder of the
18 cross-examination on this subject be heard in closed session, and the
19 reason for that request is that the last time we had a witness from Kljuc
20 that Ms. Edgerton cross-examined and put to that witness that he was
21 responsible for crimes in Biljani and other areas of Kljuc was
22 Marko Adamovic, who at the time he testified, had been acquitted of those
23 crimes. Two weeks after his testimony, his conviction was -- his
24 acquittal was overturned and he was convicted and sentenced to prison,
25 and it remains unclear to what extent the public broadcast of his
1 testimony had any influence on that, and I think it's in the interest of
2 the witness if she's going to be putting this kind of cross-examination
3 to him, and then looking through the exhibits that they have notified us,
4 it seems like that's the direction in which it's going, I think it's in
5 the interest of this witness that the testimony be in closed session so
6 that he doesn't suffer the same fate.
7 JUDGE KWON: So your basis again? The witness is not invoking
8 his right to refuse to testify about incriminating events.
9 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct and we appreciate that. But given
10 the fact that these events are the subject of prosecution in the court of
11 Bosnia, it appears that it's in the best interest of the witness and the
12 Chamber that the testimony of this nature be given in closed session.
13 And I note that the witness also doesn't have counsel, so he doesn't have
14 anyone to raise that issue other than me doing it for him.
15 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton.
16 MS. EDGERTON: I think that's something Mr. Tieger will address
17 you on, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
19 Yes, Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER: It is inappropriate of Mr. Robinson to raise this
21 entirely speculative and unfounded assertion about the alleged
22 relationship between a -- an ongoing legal proceeding and our trial here.
23 He has no basis whatsoever for making this claim except the thinnest of
24 insinuations. He's the one who has been pressing at every possible
25 juncture for an open trial. Even if there was some basis for doing that,
1 the -- going into closed session or private session could only have the
2 opposite impact in that it would have a -- the strongest of suggestions
3 that the events about which this witness is explaining and protesting his
4 innocence were highly incriminatory to the witness because we went into
5 the private session when it would seem to me would stimulate
6 investigations in prosecutions rather than anything else.
7 In any event, particularly given the standard raised by the
8 Defence during the course of this proceeding, there seems to be no basis
9 whatsoever for taking the action suggested by Mr. Robinson.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber agrees with Mr. Tieger. And the witness
12 hasn't invoked his right pursuant to Rule 90(E) not to answer the
13 questions which would incriminate him. And further, all Ms. Edgerton has
14 done was put questions based upon the documents which are publicly
15 available, including the judgement. So the Chamber is not satisfied the
16 Chamber should go into private session.
17 Mr. Kevac, I take it you understand what we just discussed. But
18 I just wanted to remind you that you have a right not to answer the
19 question or notwithstanding the fact that the Chamber still has the power
20 to compel you to answer the question, as I advised you at the outset of
21 your testimony.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, thank you for this.
23 But I reckoned and I still reckon on speaking the truth and only the
24 truth. But in giving my answers, I was focused only on the answers and
25 forgot about that right. I thank Mr. Robinson. But indeed, if we want
1 to find as much truth as possible and as much as I know, then it would be
2 a good idea to apply these other measures as well.
3 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure I understood you in full. Could you be
4 more specific, Mr. Kevac.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My wish is to tell the real truth
6 to the extent that I know. And in focusing on answers and events, I had
7 forgotten about invoking that right, and I thank Mr. Robinson for
8 reminding me.
9 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We'll proceed and see how it evolves.
10 MR. ROBINSON: I think he's asking -- maybe --
11 JUDGE KWON: [Overlapping speakers]
12 MR. ROBINSON: -- we're not understanding it the same way but --
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, you may invoke your privilege not to answer the
14 question which -- the answer of which may incriminate you in a criminal
15 offence depending upon the question.
16 So we'll hear the question from Ms. Edgerton and see whether you
17 trigger that privilege or not.
18 Yes, Mr. Robinson.
19 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, given that we have come to the
20 end of our court day, I would ask that the Trial Chamber take a recess at
21 this time and give Mr. Kevac the opportunity to consult with a counsel to
22 be assigned to him so that he could understand what his rights are --
23 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
24 MR. ROBINSON: [Overlapping speakers]
25 JUDGE KWON: I'm sorry to interrupt you. Who is going to assign
1 counsel to him?
2 MR. ROBINSON: I am asking the Chamber to have Registry provide
3 him with an assigned counsel so --
4 JUDGE KWON: The basis of which is what?
5 MR. ROBINSON: The basis of which is that he now has expressed an
6 indication to possibly take advantage of protective -- of measures that
7 could protect his rights for self-incrimination. Those could include
8 asserting his right not to answer a question or requesting a
9 closed session. And I'm not the --
10 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours --
11 MR. ROBINSON: I'm not his lawyer, so that --
12 MS. EDGERTON: -- isn't this a discussion that is better had in
13 the absence of the witness? I'm sorry, I don't mean anything
14 inappropriate, but just a note of caution.
15 JUDGE KWON: Do you remember the Chamber once referred to the
16 three categories of persons to whom the Tribunal will assign counsel?
17 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, I do, Mr. President. And I also remember
18 your ruling in the case of Mr. Kovac, that when there are exceptional
19 circumstances, the Chamber would assign counsel to someone even if they
20 don't fit within those tree categories. And I think that this comes
21 within that, because we have now -- if you look at the exhibits that the
22 Prosecution is proposing to use, I think you'll understand even better.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber clearly advised him of his right before
25 he commenced giving his testimony, and I repeated it now. And therefore
1 the Chamber sees no basis to suspend the proceeding at the moment. We
3 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just ask one thing. The
5 witness said that perhaps it would not be a bad idea to think of other
6 measures --
7 JUDGE KWON: [Overlapping speakers]
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like the Chamber to find
9 out whether that meant closing the session. Did he mean closing the
10 session? The witness has the right to ask for that.
11 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber was not satisfied to go
12 into private session at the time. We'll see, and then depending upon the
13 question, if the witness invokes his right pursuant to Rule 90(E), the
14 Chamber consider his request again.
15 Let us continue.
16 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
17 Q. Mr. Kevac, I'd just like to go back some time in the discussion
18 to the last answer that you gave, to remind you of it, and I'd like to
19 ask you a question based on that. You said the first communication
20 between this radio was between Marko Samardzija and the assistant
21 commander for legal and morale guidance and legal affairs. Who was that?
22 A. That was Spasoje Djukanovic. Late Spasoje Djukanovic,
24 Q. Thank you. You then said that:
25 "The assignment of the unit of which Marko Samardzija was a
1 member, after gathering Muslim men and after security people arrived, was
2 to let them go home. I repeated that to Marko, as far as I remember."
3 So my question to you is based on that answer. You would agree
4 that you were the superior officer of Marko Samardzija; correct?
5 A. I don't know which answer to give you to explain I was not. And
6 how am I supposed to explain my role in that case and in that unit up to
7 August? If it can be of any assistance. I refused to be the commander
8 of that unit for my personal reasons, and some of the suspicions I had at
9 the time unfortunately came true. However, when it came to the moment
10 when the unit was supposed to go into combat, a Serbian officer does not
11 decline to serve because among other virtues he has the virtue of valour
12 and honour, and that is why then I accepted to be the commander. All the
13 way up to then, I was just the commanding officer engaged in completely
14 different assignments, mainly to do with the establishment and training
15 of the unit.
16 The command of the unit had two levels: Group occupations and
17 staff combat drills. Because people who occupied those positions in the
18 command never actually did these things. I, on the other hand, had
19 knowledge about All People's Defence and the regulations enabled me to do
20 this. So my job was to establish the battalion and train the battalion.
21 And in communication, some other terms were perhaps sometimes used.
22 Q. Now, in regard -- looking at the answer you just gave, I'd like
23 to ask you this: In regard to this operation, do I understand you to say
24 that you accepted to be the commander? Yes or no.
25 A. I accepted the duty of commander in August, and this is July. In
1 the end of August, I received the order appointing me.
2 Q. Now going back to this same answer that I had just read out to
3 you in part, am I correct in understanding that at that day -
4 10 July 1992 - you did have communication with Marko Samardzija?
5 A. You're asking me?
6 Q. Yeah. I want you to confirm what you said. You said -- I'll
7 read you the sentence. You said:
8 "The assignment of the unit of which Marko Samardzija was a
9 member, after gathering Muslim men and after the security people arrived,
10 was to let them go home. I repeated that to Marko, as far as I can
12 That means you did have communication with Marko Samardzija on
13 the 10th of July, 1992, at Biljani. That's what your answer means;
15 A. Yes. But I have to emphasise once again because it will make it
16 easier for both you and me. The assignment, when I said to let them go
17 home, I meant that the members of that unit should go home after
18 finishing their assignment because there was no other assignment. And my
19 communication with Marko was the second communication, because the first
20 communication he had was with the assistant commander for morale
21 guidance, legal, and religious affairs. I was not there at the moment he
22 called -- they called me, and I repeated what was said to them before:
23 When you finish this, go home. Because I explained to you before, these
24 people were not in the barracks. They were in their own homes. They
25 guarded their own villages, standing guard and doing patrol, and we had a
1 list of them as members of the battalion. And I've told you the same
2 thing in my previous answer.
3 Q. So Marko called you, contacted you, told you something strange
4 was happening, and your evidence is: Send the men home. Right?
5 A. That's only one talk. I would remember. Marko never told me
6 that. He never even confirmed it when he came to the station when I saw
7 him. He didn't say anything was afoot. And finally, I couldn't even
8 know that.
9 Q. Right.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I see there is about, by my computer,
12 one minute to go in the court day and probably to get the next sentence
13 out would take me more than that one minute.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll adjourn here today.
15 Mr. Kevac, we'll continue tomorrow morning at 9.00. Can I advise
16 you not to discuss with anybody else about your testimony while you are
17 giving evidence here. But it does not prohibit you from getting opinion,
18 consultation from any lawyer if you so wish.
19 But, Mr. Robinson, the Chamber finds no basis to assign counsel
20 for the witness at the moment. The case of Mr. Tomo Kovac was different
21 and not comparable to this witness. He was once interviewed as a suspect
22 by the Prosecutor and with counsel assigned, and in another proceeding he
23 was already assigned counsel. So that was the basis on which we allowed
24 counsel to be assigned to Tomo Kovac. Hearing is adjourned.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.47 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 30th day
2 of January, 2014, at 9.00 a.m.