Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 6224

1 Wednesday, 4 October 2000

2 [Open session]

3 --- Upon commencing at 9.41 a.m.

4 [The accused entered court]

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated.

6 Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning to the technical

7 booth, the interpreters, the legal assistants, the registrar, the office

8 of the Prosecution, Defence counsel, the accused.

9 As we promised yesterday, we're going to render our decision

10 regarding the motion of the Prosecution to admit into evidence the

11 statement of the witness Tariq Malik. I'm going to read slowly for the

12 benefit of the interpreters.

13 On the 29th of September, 2000, the Prosecutor filed a motion for

14 the Chamber to admit the statement of witness Tariq Malik. In her motion,

15 the Prosecutor underlined that this statement should be evaluated in the

16 context of the statement of the witnesses, of the expert witnesses, White,

17 Clark, Brown, Klonowski, and Alonso.

18 The Prosecutor indicates that, for this reason, its motion is

19 based on Rule 94 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, recognising

20 that the statement of Mr. Malik does not fully fit within the context of

21 the provisions of that rule.

22 The Prosecutor finally specified that the Defence counsel were

23 contacted and that they have no objection to the admission of that

24 statement. At the hearing yesterday, the Defence first indicated that

25 they were, indeed, in agreement. However, when the Chamber started to

Page 6225

1 render its decision, the Defence interrupted the Chamber and notified the

2 Chamber that in fact they objected to the admission if the witness is

3 expected to appear.

4 The Chamber would like to make a few observations. By way of

5 introduction, the Chamber would like to note that the Prosecutor did not

6 file her motion simultaneously in both official languages. I'm talking

7 about the motion itself and not of the statement and the annexes. This is

8 a very brief document. In the interest of expediency, the Chamber is

9 nevertheless going to rule.

10 On the substance, the statement that the Prosecutor is requesting

11 admission of is neither dated nor signed. The witness also did not

12 initial the pages of the text. It would therefore be appropriate for the

13 Prosecutor to have the statement authenticated by the witness during the

14 witness's appearance in court. If the witness for one reason or another

15 does not appear, it would be up to the Prosecution to file with the

16 registrar an initialled, dated, and signed statement. This new document

17 would replace the previous statement.

18 In any event, the statement of Mr. Malik constitutes a relevant

19 piece of evidence, and the Chamber needs to verify that it has probative

20 value. It therefore can be admitted, in conformity with Rule 89 of the

21 Rules of Procedure and Evidence, once Mr. Malik appears and can be

22 cross-examined by the Defence.

23 That is the decision of the Chamber.

24 Mr. Prosecutor, now I think we can now call to the witness box the

25 witness to continue her testimony.

Page 6226

1 [The witness entered court]


3 [Witness answered through interpreter]

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good morning, Witness U. Can

5 you hear me?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning. Yes, I can hear you.

7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You may be seated.

8 I hope you feel rested today. I wish to remind you that you are

9 still testifying under oath, and you will be answering questions that

10 Mr. Saxon is going to put to you. Will you please get close to the

11 microphone, if you can, and make yourself as comfortable as possible.

12 Mr. Saxon, your witness.

13 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. Witness U, yesterday you described how Mladjo Radic came to your

15 sleeping room at the Omarska camp and called out Jadranka Cigelj several

16 times. Would this occur during the evening or during the morning?

17 A. In the evening.

18 Q. Witness U, were you ever called out at night from that sleeping

19 room?

20 THE INTERPRETER: We cannot hear anything, I'm afraid.

21 Q. How often were you called out at night?

22 A. Several times.

23 THE INTERPRETER: But I'm afraid we cannot hear. The microphone

24 is not working.

25 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, we're told the microphone is not

Page 6227

1 working.

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] There appears to be a problem,

3 Witness U. We cannot hear you. Let us see if we can fix it.

4 I think we're waiting for someone to come into the courtroom to

5 try and fix the microphone, as it doesn't appear to be working.

6 Witness U, I am not going to say 1, 2, 3, but can you hear me?

7 We're just trying to test the microphone.

8 A. Yes.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Is it working now or not? The

10 interpreters are hearing, so I think we can try and continue, Mr. Saxon.

11 Excuse us, Witness, for this technical problem, but we're going to

12 try and continue.

13 Mr. Saxon.

14 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.

15 Q. Witness U, do you know the identity of the person who called you

16 out at night?

17 THE INTERPRETER: We're very sorry, but the microphone of the

18 witness is not working. I'm sorry. Yes. Yes, it's all right now. Could

19 the witness be asked to repeat her answer, please.

20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No, no. The interpreters are

21 telling us that they can't hear the witness.

22 THE INTERPRETER: But they can now, Your Honour. The interpreters

23 can hear now.

24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] But we have already, at the same

25 time, the indication that it's working.

Page 6228

1 So let's continue, Mr. Saxon. We're not accustomed to these

2 interruptions, but we can't help it. So please continue.

3 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. I will repeat my last

4 question.

5 Q. Witness U, do you know the identity of the person who called you

6 out at night?

7 A. No.

8 Q. When you were called out at night, where were you taken?

9 A. To a room along the corridor, at the end of the corridor. There

10 was a room there, and I was taken to that room.

11 MR. SAXON: Mr. Usher, if I could ask you to please take the

12 exhibit that was marked yesterday as Prosecution 3/150 and place that back

13 on the ELMO, please.

14 Q. Witness U, can you pick up the pointer and indicate on that

15 diagram next to you where you were taken at night.

16 A. I would go out of the room, walk along the corridor, and at the

17 end, this room here.

18 Q. And what is the number on that diagram of that room that you're

19 pointing to?

20 A. It is room B1. I think it was that room.

21 Q. Could you pick up a pen that is next to you and write the letter

22 "U" in that room where you were taken.

23 A. [Marks]

24 Q. Witness U, what was in that room on the nights --

25 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Saxon.

Page 6229

1 MR. SAXON: I apologise.

2 Q. Witness U, what was in that room on the nights when you were taken

3 there?

4 A. The guard who would take me there would take me to that room

5 because it was dark, of course, and I could feel that there were

6 mattresses on the ground. He would rape me. Then I would stay behind in

7 the room. He would leave, and then all the time, one after another,

8 others would come in -- I don't know the exact number -- but,

9 unfortunately, I don't know who they were, and they also raped me.

10 Q. Witness U, were you ever taken out during the day at the Omarska

11 camp?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. How many times?

14 A. Twice.

15 Q. Where were you sitting when you were called on these two

16 occasions?

17 A. In the restaurant.

18 Q. And where were you taken on those two occasions?

19 A. To the same room.

20 Q. Is that the room that you marked as B1 on that diagram?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What happened when you were taken to that room during the day?

23 A. The same man did it. He took me out. He took me to that room.

24 First he raped me, and then afterwards again others entered, I don't know

25 exactly, three or four men who raped me. But, unfortunately, I don't know

Page 6230

1 those men. I never saw them in my life. But as it was daytime, I may be

2 able to recognise them.

3 Q. Witness --

4 A. I apologise, but I'm having problems with my headphones.

5 MR. SAXON: Mr. Usher, if that diagram could be removed now,

6 please.

7 Q. Witness U, when you say these men raped you at Omarska, do you

8 mean that they penetrated you with their penis?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Did you experience bleeding due to the multiple rapes that you

11 endured at the Omarska camp?

12 A. Yes, throughout I was there.

13 Q. Were you ever provided with any sanitary supplies?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Did you ever ask for any sanitary supplies?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Why not?

18 A. Simply I knew where I was, and it never occurred to me to address

19 anyone and seek his assistance.

20 Q. What did you do to cope with this bleeding?

21 A. I don't know. It was so shocking that perhaps I borrowed from

22 some women who had vests -- or who borrowed their underwear -- lent me

23 their underwear. Sometimes I would put paper. Anyway, that is how I

24 coped.

25 Q. Witness U, I'd like to ask you to turn your attention to call-outs

Page 6231

1 of other persons at Omarska. Are you familiar with an area in the

2 restaurant building at the Omarska camp that was known as the "glass

3 house"?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. When, if ever, were prisoners called out of the "glass house"?

6 A. Yes. This could have been at the end of July.

7 Q. Where were you when the prisoners were called out of the "glass

8 house"?

9 A. In the restaurant.

10 Q. Did you recognise any of the prisoners who were called out of the

11 "glass house" that day?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Who did you recognise?

14 A. Dr. Begic.

15 Q. How did you know Dr. Begic?

16 A. I knew Dr. Begic from before. He was a physician.

17 Q. What was Dr. Begic's ethnicity?

18 A. I cannot say with certainty whether he was a Muslim or a Croat. I

19 don't know.

20 Q. Who else did you recognise as they were called out of the "glass

21 house" that day?

22 A. That day, Dr. Kosuran was also called out, whom I knew. That is

23 what I can remember regarding the "glass house."

24 Q. Were there any teachers called out that day?

25 A. Yes, yes. My teacher, Crnkic, a mathematics teacher who was also

Page 6232

1 in the "glass house."

2 Q. Do you know the ethnicity of Professor Crnkic?

3 A. He was a Muslim.

4 Q. Were any relatives of yours called out that day?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Could you see where these prisoners were taken at that time?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Where were they taken?

9 A. They were taken out of the "glass house" and then led around the

10 building to the "red house" which was at the end of the pista, as we

11 called it, or at the edge of the compound.

12 Q. What happened that night?

13 A. That night, in my opinion, the people who were called out were

14 most probably executed. The whole night we could hear gunfire. I repeat,

15 we listened to the gunfire and the noise made by the guards who were

16 cursing, and I quote, they were cursing "Ustashas," "balijas," and that's

17 all.

18 Q. Witness U, the next morning, what did you see?

19 A. The next morning, when the detainees came to the restaurant to

20 eat, it was terrible. There were quite a number of our friends -- my

21 friends and acquaintances did not come to the restaurant.

22 Q. Did you see any trucks the next morning?

23 A. Yes. Early, before dawn, one of the women, I wouldn't like to

24 name her now, went to the toilet which was across the way from our room.

25 This toilet had a window, and she saw trucks with corpses, so that two

Page 6233

1 other colleagues and myself went there. That was the only time that I

2 went there to look, and it was true, there were trucks there with corpses.

3 Q. Can you describe these trucks that you saw?

4 A. As far as I was able to see, since these were only seconds of time

5 that we had, that these trucks were like dumpers, that is what we called

6 these trucks, which were used to transport ore in the mine. So my opinion

7 is that they were that kind of truck.

8 Q. Did you ever see the men who were called out from the "glass

9 house" again?

10 A. No.

11 Q. You mentioned previously that there were quite a number of your

12 friends and acquaintances who did not come to the restaurant the next

13 morning. Did those friends and acquaintances ever come to the restaurant

14 again while you were detained at Omarska?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Witness U, prior to the armed conflict in 1992, did you know a man

17 named Mr. Suljic?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. How did you know Mr. Suljic?

20 A. (redacted), and I knew him extremely well, both

21 him and his parents.

22 Q. What was Mr. Suljic's ethnicity?

23 A. I have to say that his father was Muslim and his mother was Serb,

24 so I don't know what to tell you in answer to your question. I think he

25 was a Muslim.

Page 6234

1 Q. Did you ever see Mr. Suljic at the Omarska camp?

2 A. Only on that occasion when I saw his tragic end in the camp.

3 Q. What happened to Mr. Suljic when you saw him at Omarska?

4 A. Mr. Suljic -- that is to say, a group of guards, some were in the

5 middle of the pista, hit Mr. Suljic with various objects. As far as I was

6 able to see, they beat him to death.

7 Q. And where were you at this time?

8 A. In the restaurant.

9 Q. Approximately how far from Mr. Suljic were you at this time?

10 A. As far as I'm able to judge, from where I was to where he was, it

11 might have been ten to 15 metres. That is my assessment.

12 Q. Did you ever see Mr. Suljic after that day?

13 A. No.

14 Q. When you saw Mr. Suljic being beaten on that occasion, was it

15 daytime or nighttime?

16 A. Daytime.

17 Q. Witness U, previously you described how you were transferred to

18 the Trnopolje camp on the 3rd of August, 1992. When, if ever, did you see

19 Zoran Zigic at the Trnopolje camp?

20 A. Yes, that same day. On the 3rd of August.

21 Q. About what time of day did you see Mr. Zigic?

22 A. I think it was around noon or perhaps in the afternoon.

23 Q. Where inside the Trnopolje camp were you when you first saw Zoran

24 Zigic that day?

25 A. I was in the school building in Trnopolje.

Page 6235

1 Q. And where was Zoran Zigic when you saw him?

2 A. We were inside, and we could see through the window. We could see

3 him arrive, Mr. Zigic arrive, and as far as I remember, there were two or

4 three other men with him.

5 Q. When you say "we," that "we could see him arrive," who was with

6 you at the time?

7 A. The women who were detained in the Omarska camp.

8 Q. How was Zoran Zigic dressed that day?

9 A. That day too Zoran was wearing a military uniform with a red

10 beret, a cap. The description is the same as I gave yesterday.

11 Q. What happened, if anything, as Zoran Zigic approached the entrance

12 to the school?

13 A. Zoran Zigic went into the courtyard, and while he was entering the

14 courtyard, the guard who was at the entrance in front of our room ordered

15 us women to lie down on the floor, and he said, "Lie down. Zoran Zigic is

16 coming."

17 Q. Did you lie down on the floor?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And as you lay down on the floor, what, if anything, could you

20 hear?

21 A. Zigic addressed the guard who was standing at the door and asked

22 him where the women were.

23 Q. What else, if anything, did Mr. Zigic say?

24 A. Yes. He repeated the question. He said, "Where are the women?"

25 So that the guard standing at the doorway told him that there were no

Page 6236

1 women there. I think that was an order when he said to him, "I'm

2 responsible here for these people. So please, Mr. Zigic, would you leave

3 this area."

4 Q. And during that time, were you able to recognise the voice of

5 Zoran Zigic?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Did Mr. Zigic say anything about work or a job?

8 A. Yes. His words afterwards were the following: "I'm going to

9 Omarska now. I have to finish off a job there."

10 Q. Witness U --

11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.


13 Q. Witness U, following your detention in 1992, what efforts did you

14 make to learn the fate of your husband?

15 A. Unfortunately, as -- I know 100 per cent the end my husband came

16 to, and I registered this with the International Red Cross. I registered

17 his name and surname as somebody who had disappeared, and I'm waiting for

18 their answer.

19 Q. Very briefly, what did you learn about your husband's end?

20 A. From more than a hundred witnesses, and even that is a

21 conservative number, later on when I went (redacted), they told me that my

22 husband was beaten up, that my husband was killed in the Omarska camp in

23 broad daylight, and there were a hundred witnesses to this.

24 Q. Witness U --

25 A. Hundreds of witnesses.

Page 6237

1 Q. -- after you were released from detention, did you and your

2 children eventually leave Bosnia?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Who lives in your apartment in Prijedor today?

5 A. A Serbian family.

6 Q. How would you describe the impact of losing your husband and your

7 own experiences in the camps on your life today?

8 A. I have to say that in 1992, my life stopped. First of all, I

9 don't feel like a woman anymore. There's no more happiness in our home.

10 We don't experience any nice moments any more, any good days. We don't

11 know when our birthdays are anymore. We're living. Sometimes I say I'm

12 just living. I have two children, and I have to live for them.

13 Q. Witness U, are you able to continue?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Can you describe how Zoran Zigic looked when you saw him in 1992?

16 A. I have to say that, from the aspects of a woman, Zoran Zigic was a

17 very, very handsome man and that he looked excellent in the uniform he

18 wore in 1992. That's my answer.

19 Q. About how tall was he?

20 A. I can only tell you roughly and say that he was tall. Perhaps

21 188, 1 metre 88. That's my assessment. He was slim, he had a dark

22 complexion, and let me repeat, he was very handsome.

23 Q. How would you describe Mr. Zigic's hair?

24 A. He had black hair.

25 Q. About how old would you say Mr. Zigic was in 1992?

Page 6238

1 A. I would say he was the same age as my husband. Perhaps not

2 exactly. One or two years difference. But he was about 38 years old,

3 possibly 40.

4 Q. Have you seen Zoran Zigic since you left the Omarska camp?

5 A. On the television screen about two years ago.

6 Q. Witness, let me rephrase that last question. Have you seen Zoran

7 Zigic since you left the Omarska and Trnopolje camps? Would your answer

8 be the same?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Since you saw Zoran Zigic in the Trnopolje camp, have you seen him

11 on television?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And approximately when was that?

14 A. About two years ago.

15 Q. Witness U, although eight years have passed since your confinement

16 in the Keraterm, Omarska, and Trnopolje camps, do you think that you could

17 identify the person you knew as Zoran Zigic today?

18 A. I can try.

19 Q. Would you please look around the courtroom to determine if you

20 could identify the person whom you referred to in your testimony as Zoran

21 Zigic.

22 A. Yes. Mr. Zigic is sitting in the first row. He is wearing a

23 white shirt, a tie, a pink or violet one, bluish, and a jacket. I can't

24 say if it's blue or black, but it's dark blue or black, anyway.

25 Q. When you say that Mr. Zigic is sitting in the first row, is that

Page 6239

1 the row closest to the wall or the row away from the wall?

2 A. Further away from the wall. In the first row closest to me.

3 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, if the record could reflect a positive

4 identification of the accused Zigic.

5 Your Honour, at this time I have no further questions.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you, Mr. Saxon.

7 Mr. Krstan Simic, what is the order for the cross-examination,

8 please?

9 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I

10 shall be putting questions to the witness; Mr. Jovanovic, and

11 Mr. Stojanovic, and it will be very brief.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Just one moment, please. I'm

13 going to consult my colleagues.

14 [Trial Chamber confers]

15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Witness U, do you feel tired?

16 Would you like to have a rest, or do you feel up to continuing until

17 approximately 11.00?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll continue.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.

20 Mr. Simic, Mr. Krstan Simic has the floor.

21 Witness, you are now going to be answering questions put to you by

22 the Defence counsels.

23 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm ready.

24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Please go ahead.

25 Your witness, Mr. Simic.

Page 6240

1 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

2 Cross-examined by Mr. K. Simic:

3 Q. [Interpretation] Witness U, first of all, I'd like to express my

4 sincere condolences for everything you have gone through.

5 A. Thank you.

6 Q. I'm going to ask you about the time you spent in Omarska. I hope

7 that they won't be as painful as the things you've had to talk about over

8 the last few minutes.

9 You said that when you arrived in Omarska, you were put up in the

10 "white house," that you spent several hours there, and you described that

11 place. Is that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. You also testified that at one point a group of soldiers, guards

14 or something like that, moved towards that place.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Can you tell us or do you happen to know whether they were

17 soldiers, members of the security system, or somebody else?

18 A. I'm afraid I can't answer that question. I think they were both

19 of them, both types. But as I had never seen any of those men, I can't

20 tell you their names or what kind of uniforms they were all wearing, but I

21 think they were military uniforms and police uniforms as well.

22 Q. Thank you. You also testified that a member of the Security

23 Service issued an order and said, "Don't go up to those women."

24 A. Yes, that's right.

25 Q. Could you identify that individual, the member of the Security

Page 6241

1 Service, perhaps his name or uniform, if you happen to know?

2 A. No. I didn't know the person, but I can state that that

3 particular individual was wearing a police uniform. I would be happy if I

4 were able to tell the Court his name.

5 Q. Witness U, my last question: Those persons obeyed the order of

6 that individual and did not disturb you; is that correct?

7 A. Yes, that's correct.

8 Q. Thank you. I have no further questions. And once again, I am

9 very sorry for everything that you have experienced.

10 A. Thank you, sir.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Krstan Simic.

12 Mr. Jovanovic.

13 MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Cross-examined by Mr. Jovanovic:

15 Q. [Interpretation] Witness U, good morning.

16 A. Good morning.

17 Q. My name is Zoran Jovanovic. I'm an attorney from Belgrade and,

18 together with lawyer Toma Fila, we represent the defence of the accused

19 Mr. Mladjo Krkan. Like my colleague before me, I, too, should like to say

20 how sorry I am for everything that you have had to go through, all your

21 sufferings.

22 A. Thank you.

23 Q. I will be brief. I just need some information.

24 You stated that with Mrs. Zlata Bilajac, you were in the "white

25 house"?

Page 6242

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And that you were put up in a room at the end of the corridor?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Tell me, please, between that room and the corridor, was there any

5 kind of partition, a partition wall or door or anything like that?

6 A. No, I didn't see any door. I know that I passed by, and in the

7 room there was a bench next to the window, and the two of us sat on that

8 bench.

9 Q. How large was the room?

10 A. The room was a narrow one but a long one, as far as I was able to

11 assess. The length -- the room ran the entire length of the "white

12 house," I would say.

13 Q. Thank you. You spoke about those unfortunate events and said that

14 twice -- you were taken out twice during the day from the restaurant and

15 taken to the large room on the first floor at the end of the corridor in

16 that building. Can you describe the situation? There were the stairs,

17 the staircase leading from the restaurant to the first floor, and the

18 corridor. Were there any guards there, any investigators, interrogators?

19 Did you hear anything?

20 A. No, not at that time.

21 Q. And one more question: Were there any guards in the corridor at

22 night in front of the rooms where you slept, where the women slept, either

23 outside or in the immediate vicinity?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Never?

Page 6243

1 A. I didn't see them.

2 MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have no further

3 questions?

4 A. Thank you, too.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

6 Mr. Jovanovic.

7 I think that it's Mr. Stojanovic's turn now.

8 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Please proceed,

10 Mr. Stojanovic.

11 Cross-examined by Mr. Stojanovic:

12 Q. Good morning, Witness. I have to say "Witness." It's in your

13 interest that I don't say any names. My name is Slobodan Stojanovic, from

14 Belgrade, and Mr. Simo Tosic, an attorney from Banja Luka, is with me

15 here, and together we represent the Defence of Mr. Zoran Zigic.

16 We know that you have had to experience terrible suffering in

17 these camps, and I am truly and sincerely sorry for that, and we'll try

18 and keep our questions brief.

19 I should like to help you to clarify -- I should like you to help

20 us clarify certain points.

21 Before this, you had some talks with the representatives of the

22 OTP, I suppose.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Did you, in one of your conversations, say that Zigic was a family

25 friend of yours?

Page 6244

1 A. No.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 A. May I add something to that?

4 Q. Well, I don't want to burden you with any lengthy answers, but if

5 you are brief.

6 A. (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 Q. Thank you. The event in Keraterm when you saw your late husband

9 and Zigic, you said that this was at the end of June 1992.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Can you help us and be more specific perhaps? I don't suppose you

12 remember the exact date, but was it toward the end, the last week; a

13 little more specific?

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Saxon, were you going to

15 make an objection?

16 MR. SAXON: No, Your Honour. I apologise.

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I apologise for interrupting,

18 Mr. Stojanovic. Please continue.

19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I asked the witness to help us.

20 A. Yes, I do wish to help, and everything that I say here is the

21 truth and nothing but truth.

22 As far as I recall, it could have been the end of June, perhaps

23 the beginning of July. It was either the 1st or 2nd of July or the end of

24 June, but quite definitely it was that period.

25 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 6245

1 Q. Thank you. I now have just a few more questions with respect to

2 the event that took place in Trnopolje. If I'm correct, you said that

3 Zigic came looking for women. Which women? Can you tell us?

4 A. The women who had arrived from Omarska that day.

5 Q. We heard that you were together with those women in Omarska. Did

6 you happen to notice, during their stay in Omarska, whether Zigic was in

7 any contact -- had any contacts with those women in any way whatsoever?

8 Did he try to approach the women?

9 A. No. No.

10 Q. I'm talking about Omarska.

11 A. Yes, in Omarska, and my answer is No.

12 Q. Just one more clarification, please. The Prosecution, in summary

13 of their conversation with you, noted that you did not see Zigic in

14 Trnopolje, and I'm going to read out the sentence. It's not your

15 statement, it is a proffer by the Prosecution about the talk with you.

16 MR. STOJANOVIC: And it is, for our colleagues of the Prosecution,

17 the last sentence in the proffer. "The witness did not see Zigic, but she

18 heard his voice and she heard the guard addressing that person by the name

19 of Zigic."

20 Q. So we got that information from the Prosecution, not from you. We

21 had a different answer today, that you saw Zigic, in fact. Could you tell

22 us something to clarify that dilemma?

23 A. Yes. There are no problems there. There was probably a

24 misunderstanding.

25 We were in the room with windows, and as you approach Trnopolje

Page 6246

1 from the road, we were able to see on the road -- I was able to and the

2 other women -- to see him approach. He was already there. And the guard

3 said, at that moment, "Zigic is coming." So it happened simultaneously,

4 at the same time.

5 Q. Witness U, I should like to extend our gratitude once again to

6 you.

7 A. Thank you too.

8 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] And I'd like to thank Their

9 Honours as well.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

11 Mr. Stojanovic. I think no other Defence counsel wish to cross-examine,

12 according to what Mr. Krstan Simic told us.

13 So, Mr. Saxon, do you have any re-examination for this witness?

14 MR. SAXON: Just one question, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please go ahead.

16 MR. SAXON: Thank you

17 Re-examined by Mr. Saxon:

18 Q. Witness U, you told counsel for the Defence that on the two

19 occasions when you were taken out during the day and taken to the first

20 floor of the restaurant building, that you said that you saw no guards

21 there or interrogators. What time of day was that? In other words, what

22 was going on during that period of day when you were called out on those

23 two occasions?

24 A. I think that I answered exactly. The question was when I was

25 taken there did I meet anyone. At night, no. A man led me. I don't know

Page 6247

1 who he was. As it was nighttime, I didn't come across anyone. The men

2 who later entered my room and who raped me, I couldn't see them or

3 recognise them, unfortunately. Also, on two occasions when I was taken

4 out during the daytime, my answer was that, on that occasion, I didn't

5 meet anyone. I didn't come across anyone, meet anyone.

6 Q. And on those two occasions when you were taken out during the

7 daytime, what was going on in the restaurant at that time?

8 A. It was during lunchtime, when the detainees came to have lunch.

9 Q. And would the guards and interrogators also have lunch?

10 A. No.

11 MR. SAXON: I have no further questions.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. Saxon.

13 Judge Fouad Riad, do you have any questions?

14 JUDGE RIAD: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.

15 Questioned by the Court:

16 JUDGE RIAD: Do you hear me?

17 A. Yes.

18 JUDGE RIAD: I'd just like to put some of your testimony in

19 perspective, and I'll be very brief not to increase the strain in which

20 you are definitely.

21 Going back to what you said yesterday, I think you said that Zigic

22 took your husband by the arm to the entrance and told you, "Take a good

23 look at your husband. He will fall first for the freedom of this town."

24 What did you understand from that?

25 A. When I went back home, I was very upset. All of us here in this

Page 6248

1 courtroom will each have their own interpretation of this statement, but

2 the way I understood it was that my husband would disappear.

3 Unfortunately, that is what happened.

4 JUDGE RIAD: Did he do that in a defiant way, in a threatening

5 way?

6 A. No. No. It seemed like a normal conversation. Of course, a

7 provocative one.

8 JUDGE RIAD: Now, I'll just try to go further with the same. You

9 said that when you were -- apparently when he came, I think, to Trnopolje,

10 you heard him say, "I'm going to Omarska to finish a job." Was that

11 right?

12 A. Yes, yes.

13 JUDGE RIAD: He did not mention what job it was. Nobody ever told

14 you what happened that day?

15 A. No, no.

16 JUDGE RIAD: When you went to, when you went (redacted), you

17 said -- I'm sorry, wherever you went, you heard from witnesses that your

18 husband was killed on Omarska in broad daylight?

19 A. Yes.

20 JUDGE RIAD: And did they tell you approximately which date it

21 was?

22 A. Unfortunately, I have never managed to find out the exact date,

23 but it could have been a day or two before I was picked up to be taken to

24 the camp. That is the information I have. It could have been the 11th or

25 the 12th or the 13th of July.

Page 6249

1 JUDGE RIAD: And do you remember approximately which date it was

2 when Zigic came to Trnopolje to say he's going to a mission in Omarska?

3 A. The 3rd of August.

4 JUDGE RIAD: The 3rd of August. With regard to this incident when

5 he came to Trnopolje to ask about women and the guard then told him, "This

6 is my responsibility, this is my territory," did you understand what it

7 was about, why he was coming and what the guard then was defending?

8 A. I have to say what is accurate. Zigic didn't do anything. He

9 didn't try to do anything, and he went away quickly. I have no right to

10 say now or to think what he had in mind when he said that, nor what his

11 intention was.

12 JUDGE RIAD: Again, concerning the witnesses who told you about

13 your husband's death, did they more or less tell you who was present at

14 that day, the guards or the camp leaders?

15 A. I had a wide range of disparate information so that really here in

16 this Tribunal, I wouldn't like, nor have I the right, to give names of

17 people who were there because I myself did not witness it. But I do know

18 with certainty that my husband is no longer alive, and I think that 100

19 per cent the gentlemen sitting here, they all know my husband well. They

20 know his first and last name, and they know when he was killed and why. I

21 am sure of that.

22 JUDGE RIAD: But you don't know anything?

23 A. I don't.

24 JUDGE RIAD: Still concerning the killing, you mentioned that

25 prisoners were taken out of the "glass house"; you saw that from the

Page 6250

1 toilet window, and I want to repeat what you said about the shooting and

2 seeing the trucks collecting them. Since you were very present, do you

3 remember who was the leader of the camp at that time or the guards around

4 among those you know?

5 A. No. I don't remember.

6 JUDGE RIAD: Then I just ask you a question, a small one, before

7 going to a difficult one.

8 You said that Mr. Prcac came with a list of women the last day,

9 and you were among this list. Is this the only time you saw him, the only

10 time he was present?

11 A. Perhaps on one more occasion that I saw him in the corridor in

12 front of our room. That is all.

13 JUDGE RIAD: Does that mean that he was not often there, or it was

14 you -- you're not always accessible to see people?

15 A. I couldn't see people because I was a specific case in that camp.

16 I was a person who just sat there quietly in silence so that I couldn't

17 see much.

18 JUDGE RIAD: Now, you mentioned that the women told you that Krkan

19 was a shift leader. Did you see him often around, at night or by day?

20 A. Yes, I saw Krkan often at night, probably when he or when his duty

21 -- his shift was on duty, and I said yesterday how I saw him and where.

22 That is the truth. So in our room when he would bring us food, and when

23 he would appear at the door to call out Jadranka Cigelj to come out or to

24 come and see him for a while, that's all.

25 JUDGE RIAD: All right. If your memory can serve you, the man who

Page 6251

1 used to -- the guard that came to you several times at night to take you

2 to this unfortunate room, was it during the shift of Krkan?

3 A. No.

4 JUDGE RIAD: It was not? It was never in the shift of Krkan?

5 A. No, no.

6 JUDGE RIAD: Do you know whose shift it was?

7 A. No.

8 JUDGE RIAD: I have to thank you for the very precise testimony

9 you gave and being so fair and not trying to say anything you don't know.

10 Please know that, through this Tribunal, the whole world is sharing your

11 grief, and I wish you courage. Thank you.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

13 Judge Riad.

14 Madam Judge Wald. Thank you.

15 JUDGE WALD: Witness U, I have only two questions. One, when you

16 arrived at Omarska, is it true that you never saw your husband? He was no

17 longer there when you got to Omarska; is that right?

18 A. Yes.

19 JUDGE WALD: Did you ask people at that time around the camp where

20 he was or whether he was still there? You mentioned that you heard later

21 on in a different place from a lot of witnesses, but at the time, did you

22 ask people at Omarska where he was or if something had happened to him?

23 A. Yes, I did ask because, throughout my stay there, I was waiting

24 for him to appear. But everyone knew, including the women and the men

25 with whom I was able to have any contact, and this was very rare. The

Page 6252

1 women I was with, they knew, but they probably hid it from me so that I

2 would survive more easily.

3 So they concealed it from me. They would say, he's in hospital in

4 Banja Luka, or he's here or there, so that throughout that time I lived in

5 expectation that he would appear. And it was only on that day, the 3rd of

6 August, when I left the camp and when I was in Trnopolje, a friend of ours

7 managed to have the strength to tell me, "(redacted) has been killed. You

8 must accept that and not wait for him anymore."

9 JUDGE WALD: Thank you, witness. I'm sorry to go over such sad

10 details. My last question is --

11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone please, Judge.

12 JUDGE WALD: Sorry.

13 I'm sorry to put you through that again. One last question, which

14 is an ordinary one.

15 When in the beginning the group of soldiers or -- came towards you

16 and then another guard came along and said, "Don't approach those women,"

17 was there any indication that you could tell at the time that the guard

18 that protected you by saying, "Don't approach those women," was just an

19 ordinary guard of rank, the same as other guards or soldiers in the camp,

20 or whether he held some higher position of authority, like a shift leader

21 or an official in the camp? Did he appear to be just another guard

22 telling the other guards, "Don't come near these women," or did he appear

23 to be somebody of a higher rank or position? Could you tell? If you

24 couldn't, that's okay.

25 A. Yes, it was an ordinary guard.

Page 6253

1 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Thank you.

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

3 Judge Wald.

4 Witness U, I have a few small questions for you which will not

5 take too long.

6 You mentioned the incident in the "white house," and you said that

7 there were people in military uniform and the police. How do you make a

8 distinction between military uniforms and police uniforms?

9 A. Well, a military uniform was grey in colour, greyish-green, and a

10 police uniform consisted of a light blue shirt and blue trousers.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Did you see those military men

12 and those policemen later on in the Omarska camp?

13 A. Yes.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Could you tell us what were

15 their duties in the camp?

16 A. Yes. Those guards mistreated people, beat them during lunch, at

17 the pista. I'm saying what I saw. That was the work they did.

18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Witness U, when you say "those

19 guards," you're referring to the guards wearing military uniforms and

20 police uniforms that you saw before in the "white house"?

21 A. Yes. I'm referring to both.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So could you tell us how many

23 different uniforms there were in the camp?

24 A. As far as I know and as far as I was able to see, there was the

25 police uniform and the military uniform.

Page 6254

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Were there both at the same

2 time?

3 A. Not every day.

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So, Witness U, I have no more

5 questions for you. You have answered our questions, many questions, put

6 to you by the Prosecution, the Defence, the Judges, with a great deal of

7 courage.

8 Is there something that you would like to say and that you have

9 not been asked? Is there something that you would like to tell us in

10 addition to what you have already said?

11 THE WITNESS: Yes. I would like to address myself to this Trial

12 Chamber, the gentlemen in the Defence counsel, the gentlemen who are on

13 trial, and to say that I think this testimony of mine was so brief and

14 concise but one from which it is possible to infer the conclusion as to

15 what I lived through where I was.

16 My suffering still continues. Probably my suffering will never

17 come to an end. I have lost the man who meant a great deal for me, who

18 was a good husband, a good father. We miss him so. We need him.

19 But please let me say one more thing. I arrived at Omarska. I

20 didn't know why, because we were never part of any kind of organisation.

21 We did not engage in politics. We were honest, honourable citizens of our

22 town Prijedor. We never made any distinction between people on the basis

23 of ethnicity, be they Serbs, Croats, or Muslims. They were all the same.

24 We loved people. We socialised with them. And when I arrived at the

25 Omarska camp and went in for interrogation, I learnt there my interrogator

Page 6255

1 was Drago Meakic, the gentleman who was quite -- who treated me decently.

2 My charges were, "(redacted), it says here," and I read it out, because

3 Comrade Meakic knew me, and it said there, "(redacted), you gossiped about

4 the Serb army. You criticised the Serb army."

5 I appeal to you as human beings, what kind of an accusation is

6 that? What were the accusations against my husband so that he no longer

7 lives and my life is at a standstill?

8 That is all I have to say. Thank you.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you too, Witness U. You

10 were expelled from life, as many other people, as you said, but we hope

11 that you will find good reasons to continue to live a full life.

12 And as you said, there are no differences between people, and I

13 think we must think once again over this issue of being a Muslim or a

14 Croat or a Serb is not a defect. It's not a fault. It contributes to the

15 diversity and beauty of the world. Imagine what kind of a world it would

16 be if we would all be the same. That would be monotonous. But if we have

17 differences among which we can establish harmony, then the world will be a

18 beautiful place. So you have this ideal and this way of thought, and that

19 in itself is a good reason to continue living in spite of the terrible

20 circumstances, your personal circumstances, and we hope that you will have

21 ahead of you some good and happy days.

22 So thank you, Witness, for coming here. We wish you a safe

23 journey back to your place of residence, and I will ask the usher to

24 accompany you out.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, too.

Page 6256

1 [The witness withdrew]

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Now we're going to

3 have a half-hour break.

4 JUDGE RIAD: She spoke her name, the witness.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Saxon. I know you have

6 some exhibits to tender, so please proceed. I'm sorry.

7 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. At this time the Prosecution

8 would move for the admission of the Prosecution's Exhibits 3/148 to

9 3/151.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic.

11 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] No objection, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You're talking on behalf of all

13 Defence counsel?

14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you. So the documents

16 listed by the Prosecutor will be admitted into evidence.

17 So let us now have a half-hour break.

18 --- Recess taken at 11.10 a.m.

19 --- On resuming at 11.42 a.m.

20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated.

21 Yes, Mr. Waidyaratne.

22 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Your Honour. The Prosecution would call Witness

23 Nihad Haskic. This witness has been granted protective measures with

24 regard to only facial distortion. Thank you, Your Honour.

25 [The witness entered court]

Page 6257

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good day to you, Mr. Haskic.

2 Can you hear me?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can.

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You're now going to read the

5 solemn declaration that the usher is going to hand to you.

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

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


9 [Witness answered through interpreter]

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Try and sit comfortably.

13 Perhaps you need to adjust your headsets.

14 Thank you for coming. You are now going to be answering questions

15 put to you by the Prosecutor, Mr. Waidyaratne, and afterwards you'll be

16 answering questions from the Defence and the Judges, but first of all it

17 is Mr. Waidyaratne.

18 Mr. Waidyaratne, your witness.

19 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you, Your Honour.

20 Examined by Mr. Waidyaratne:

21 Q. Good afternoon, Witness. Could you state your full name, please.

22 A. Haskic, Nihad.

23 Q. What is your date of birth and place of birth?

24 A. The 25th of August, 1958, Prijedor.

25 Q. Were you born in the Prijedor town?

Page 6258

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Where did you reside in 1992?

3 A. In 1992, I resided in Prijedor.

4 Q. Which part of Prijedor?

5 A. It's called Zagrad. Murharem Suljanovic, number 50, is the

6 street.

7 Q. Were you married in 1992?

8 A. Yes, I was.

9 Q. Did you have children?

10 A. One child, yes.

11 Q. How old was she?

12 A. Eleven.

13 Q. Were you employed in 1992?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. What was your employment? Could you describe as to what you did

16 in 1992?

17 A. I worked on a construction site with telephonics.

18 Q. Did you have any other business?

19 A. Yes. Before that I had a cevapcici kiosk.

20 Q. Witness, in April 1992, did you have your wife and child with you

21 at the place of residence, at your place of residence?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. In May, did your wife and child go to any other place?

24 A. Yes, they went to Croatia.

25 Q. Why did they leave you?

Page 6259

1 A. Well, they went allegedly sort of for a holiday.

2 Q. Did they come back after that in the month of May 1992?

3 A. They have not returned to the present day.

4 Q. Why didn't they come back in May 1992?

5 A. Because the conditions weren't right.

6 Q. Could you describe more as to these conditions that you speak of?

7 A. They couldn't return because on the 30th of April, the power was

8 taken over and everything became topsy-turvy.

9 Q. Now you said on the 30th of April, power was taken. Can you

10 describe as to exactly what you mean by this?

11 A. Up until then, there were one set of authorities and, on the night

12 of the 30th, there was a takeover of power.

13 Q. By whom?

14 A. The Republika Srpska.

15 Q. Now, Witness, did you go to work after the 30th of April, 1992?

16 A. I couldn't.

17 Q. Why?

18 A. Because everything was stopped.

19 Q. Could you describe more as to what this everything -- what you

20 meant by "everything was stopped" and by whom?

21 A. Well, I couldn't. I worked for the last day in Rasavci, and when

22 I went to the post office on Friday to work, they said that there would be

23 no work until further notice.

24 Q. Who said this, that there would be no work?

25 A. The supervisory organs in the post office.

Page 6260

1 Q. Do you know which ethnicity or which ethnic group these people

2 belonged to?

3 A. Where?

4 Q. These people who -- the supervisory organs that you spoke of.

5 A. They were Serb Orthodox.

6 Q. Now, Witness, what was your ethnicity? What is your ethnicity?

7 A. I'm a Muslim.

8 Q. You mentioned that the power was taken in Prijedor and that it was

9 by the Serbs. Could you say as to what you observed on the 30th of

10 April?

11 A. In the morning, there were lots of policemen and soldiers. There

12 were checkpoints everywhere and all movement was practically made

13 impossible.

14 Q. By whom?

15 A. You could feel fear of all those soldiers and policemen in town.

16 Q. Did you know who these policemen and these soldiers who were in

17 town, to which ethnic group they belonged to?

18 A. I didn't know, but I assumed that they were all of the Serb

19 ethnicity.

20 Q. Now, Witness, I would draw your attention to the 24th of May,

21 1992. Were you aware that, during this time, Kozarac was attacked?

22 A. In town from the refugees, the people fleeing Kozarac. I met them

23 in town, and the people said that Kozarac was burning and had been

24 attacked and that they were running away to save their lives, mostly

25 towards Prijedor.

Page 6261

1 Q. Who were these refugees or the people that were fleeing? What

2 ethnic group did they belong to?

3 A. They were Muslims.

4 Q. Did you learn from them as to whether the surrounding villages or

5 the areas of Kozarac, whether these villages were attacked?

6 A. Yes, they were.

7 Q. What are the areas or the villages that you got to know that were

8 attacked?

9 A. Brdjani, Softici, Kamicani, Kozarusa.

10 Q. During this time, were you at home in Prijedor?

11 A. I was.

12 Q. Did you observe as to what happened in the surrounding areas?

13 A. Around Prijedor?

14 Q. Yes. And even in Kozarac and the other surrounding areas.

15 A. On the hill too. You could see that the hill of

16 Hambarine-Carakovo was also attacked.

17 Q. Did you see any houses or any property being damaged?

18 A. You mean in Prijedor or in the surrounding areas?

19 Q. In the areas of Kozarac and Hambarine and the surrounding areas.

20 A. As Kozarac is far off, I couldn't see, but you could see

21 Hambarine. You could see the hill from Prijedor, and you could see the

22 houses burning.

23 Q. Now, Witness, on the 30th of May, 1992, were you in Prijedor?

24 A. Yes, I was.

25 Q. Where were you?

Page 6262

1 A. I was in my part of town, in my house.

2 Q. Could you describe what happened on that day?

3 A. That day, in the morning, that part of the old town was attacked,

4 Zagrad, on Saturday morning, in the early-morning hours. The army --

5 there was a proclamation that white flags should be hung out and that we

6 should surrender. The army came up. The soldiers made everybody get out

7 of their houses, and they put us in a bus by the high-rise building and

8 took us off to Omarska.

9 Q. Now, Witness, you said that the army came. Did you see any of

10 these armed personnel who came into the part of your town?

11 A. I did.

12 Q. Who were they?

13 A. They were soldiers in camouflage uniforms. I didn't know them. I

14 can't say that I know them when I don't know them.

15 Q. With respect to you, when you were in the house, what did you do?

16 What were you ordered to do?

17 A. I was ordered to put a white flag out on my house.

18 Q. And thereafter, what did you do? Did you get onto the street?

19 A. We all went out into the street, and we moved spontaneously

20 towards the high-rise building, towards town.

21 Q. Now, when you got down to the street, did you see any other

22 persons, your neighbours?

23 A. Yes, I did. I saw my neighbour Fuad Nekinovic [sic], who was

24 lying there dead in the yard.

25 Q. You mentioned the name Fuad. Is it Nekinovic or Ekinovic?

Page 6263

1 A. Ekinovic.

2 Q. Do you know what happened to him?

3 A. Well, he was killed. He was lying in the yard.

4 Q. Who were the other people who were on the street and who were

5 taken towards the skyscraper?

6 A. They were all my neighbours.

7 Q. To which ethnic group, if you know, did they belong to?

8 A. They were all of the Muslim ethnicity.

9 Q. You said that you were taken to in front of the skyscraper and put

10 into buses. Before you got onto the buses and when you were moving

11 towards the centre, did you observe as to what has happened to the houses

12 or what was happening around?

13 A. The houses were burning.

14 Q. These houses, to whom did these belong to?

15 A. They were Muslims'.

16 Q. Now, Witness, before you got into the bus, did you see any other

17 persons, people killed on the street?

18 A. Yes. In the market in front of the kiosks, three or four people

19 were lying there, burnt to the bone.

20 Q. Did you recognise any of these persons who were around, who was

21 dead or who was --

22 A. No, no.

23 Q. Did you see any Serb soldiers or any persons, any armed personnel

24 there?

25 A. There were lots of them around us, armed soldiers.

Page 6264

1 Q. Now, you said that you were put onto buses and taken to Omarska.

2 Before you were taken to Omarska, were you taken to the SUP building, the

3 bus that you were in?

4 A. No. I wasn't, but it stopped there for a short time in front of

5 the SUP building, and some people were taken out there. Some were

6 returned, others I don't know. And then we went off towards Omarska.

7 Q. Did you see the people who returned to the bus as to what their

8 physical condition was, and as to who took them from the buses and brought

9 them back?

10 A. The policemen took them out and the policemen brought them back.

11 Q. What was their physical -- the condition of the people who were

12 taken from the buses?

13 A. Well, they were in a good state.

14 Q. Witness, after you left the SUP building, the bus that you were

15 in, you said that the buses reached Omarska. Is it the Omarska camp?

16 A. The Omarska camp, yes. We went via Tomasica.

17 Q. When you reached Omarska, what were you ordered to do, and by

18 whom?

19 A. We were ordered to get out of the bus, to stand against the wall,

20 lift our hands up. We were searched and then thrown into the room by the

21 restaurant.

22 Q. Now, a room, you say. Is that a room which was in the

23 administration building, the restaurant building?

24 A. Yes, it is. The administration building, right.

25 Q. Were you taken out of that room the next day to the pista?

Page 6265

1 A. To the pista, yes, I was.

2 Q. Did you spend the night, the night that you arrived in the camp,

3 in the room in the restaurant building?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Who were the others who was in that room in the restaurant

6 building?

7 A. They were the people from Prijedor who came that night and who

8 were collected up in town during the day.

9 Q. Do you know which ethnicity they belonged to?

10 A. Non-Serb nationality.

11 Q. Now, the next day, you said that you were taken to the pista.

12 When you were in the pista, were you able to see around?

13 A. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Sometimes we had to look down onto

14 the asphalt, and at other times we would have to lie down on our stomachs,

15 our faces facing the asphalt.

16 Q. Who gave these orders? Who made them, made you all do this?

17 A. The guards made us do this.

18 Q. Now, Witness, do you know a person by the name of Miroslav Kvocka?

19 A. I do.

20 Q. Did you know him before the war?

21 A. I did, superficially.

22 Q. Did you know whom he was married to?

23 A. I did.

24 Q. Please, do you know the name?

25 A. Jasminka, Jasminka Crnalic.

Page 6266

1 Q. How did you know her?

2 A. I knew her. She lives one house from mine, two houses away from

3 mine.

4 Q. Now Witness, you said that you knew Miroslav Kvocka before. Did

5 you know how he was employed?

6 A. Superficially, yes.

7 Q. How he was employed, where he was employed?

8 A. Miroslav Kvocka worked in the police station.

9 Q. Was he a policeman?

10 A. Yes, he was.

11 Q. How would you describe Miroslav Kvocka when you saw him before the

12 war?

13 A. He was tall, brown, slim.

14 Q. Would you describe his hair?

15 A. Brown hair.

16 Q. Now, did you see Miroslav Kvocka when you were in the camp?

17 A. I did.

18 Q. How was he dressed when you saw him in the camp?

19 A. In a police uniform.

20 Q. What else did you observe? Did he carry a weapon?

21 A. Yes. He had a pump-action gun and gloves on his hands with the

22 fingers cut off.

23 Q. Where would you normally see him, and doing what?

24 A. I would see him when we were at the pista, passing by. He kept

25 going back and forth to the administration building. He was moving around

Page 6267

1 there.

2 Q. Do you know what position he held or what authority he had in the

3 camp?

4 A. Well, as far as I know and what I heard from others, he was the

5 commander of the camp for a time.

6 Q. Did you see him giving orders to any of the guards or any other

7 personnel in the camp?

8 A. During the day, he would issue orders, but I couldn't hear what he

9 was saying.

10 Q. Issuing orders to whom?

11 A. To the guards.

12 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection.

13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic.

14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness explicitly

15 said that he couldn't hear what Mr. Kvocka was saying to the guards, and

16 then came the question that he issued orders.

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic, but the

18 witness said that he couldn't hear, but he supposedly saw, and that is why

19 the question followed. Therefore, the objection is overruled and you may

20 continue.

21 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 Q. My question was, did you see as to whom he issued orders to?

23 A. To the guards. Who else?

24 Q. Thank you. Witness, while you were in the camp, detained in the

25 camp, did you see a person by the name of Slavko Ecimovic?

Page 6268

1 A. I did.

2 Q. Did you know him prior to the war?

3 A. I did.

4 Q. What was the first time? When did you see Slavko Ecimovic in the

5 camp?

6 A. I saw Slavko for the first time in the camp when he was brought to

7 the camp. He was brought to the camp, his hands were tied, and his legs

8 were tied, and he had wire around his mouth.

9 Q. Now, you said that you saw him brought to the camp. Where did you

10 see him --

11 A. Yes, I did.

12 Q. -- brought?

13 A. They brought him to the pista, and he passed in front of us, and

14 they took him upstairs to the administration building. I was at the pista

15 at the time.

16 Q. You said that his hands were tied and his legs were tied, and a

17 wire around his mouth. Did you see what physical condition he was in?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Could you say how?

20 A. He was in a terrible condition.

21 Q. When Slavko Ecimovic was brought to the camp, did you see Miroslav

22 Kvocka present at that instance?

23 A. Miroslav Kvocka was there, and he said to us, "Look at Tudjman's

24 fighter."

25 Q. Did he say anything else?

Page 6269

1 A. And he said, "Look at him well, because you'll all end up like

2 him."

3 Q. When this was said, where was Miroslav Kvocka?

4 A. He was in front of the entrance.

5 Q. Entrance to which building?

6 A. The administration building.

7 Q. Now, when this was said, did you look up and see as to who was

8 being brought? Was it the time that you saw Slavko Ecimovic?

9 A. I saw Slavko Ecimovic as soon as he arrived at the pista. I

10 recognised him immediately.

11 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Your Honour, I will mark the next exhibit in

12 line, number 3/152, a photograph of the model, and have the assistance of

13 the usher to give this to the witness.

14 Q. Witness, please look at the photograph.

15 A. Yes, I do see it.

16 Q. Do you recognise this building?

17 A. Yes, very well.

18 Q. This is a photograph from the model which is also in front of

19 you. Could you place it on the ELMO and mark the place where Miroslav

20 Kvocka was standing.

21 A. [Marks]

22 Q. Could you mark it with letters "MK".

23 A. [Marks]

24 Q. And would you mark the place where you were when you saw

25 Mr. Kvocka at this time.

Page 6270

1 A. [Marks]

2 Q. Could you mark that place with the letters "NH".

3 A. [Marks]

4 Q. Will you be able to draw a line? You said that you saw Slavko

5 Ecimovic being brought. Draw a line to show from where he was brought.

6 A. [Marks]

7 Q. Could you mark it with letters "SE".

8 A. [Marks]

9 Q. Thank you. Now, Witness, you said that you saw Slavko Ecimovic

10 being taken up to the administration building.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Did you see him after that?

13 A. I saw him only one other time, in the "white house," when I was

14 there.

15 Q. "White house" where? In which room?

16 A. After the entrance, the first room to the left. He was lying on

17 the floor and he was in a terrible condition. He was moaning.

18 Q. Did you see any injuries on him?

19 A. He had injuries on his forehead, and he was in a pool of blood.

20 Q. Did you see afterwards what happened to him, Slavko Ecimovic?

21 A. That same night, before midnight, a military vehicle arrived with

22 a red cross on it, and two men carried Slavko inside, and after that I

23 never saw him again.

24 Q. Witness, how long did you stay in the "white house"?

25 A. Just one night I stayed in the "white house."

Page 6271

1 Q. Were you also detained in the hangar building?

2 A. Yes. I was detained in the hangar building upstairs, the first

3 room to the right.

4 Q. Do you recall what number it was called by the prisoners or by you

5 all?

6 A. We called it, I think, the number 25, as far as I can recollect.

7 Q. When you were detained in that room, did you see a person by the

8 name of Emir Beganovic?

9 A. Emir Beganovic was with me in that same room.

10 Q. Now, Witness, before we go further, was it number 25 or 15?

11 A. Fifteen or 25. I don't know. One of the two. Anyway, it's the

12 first room to the right when you reach the top of the staircase.

13 Q. Now, did you see a prisoner or a detainee by the name of Emir

14 Beganovic?

15 A. I did.

16 Q. Where was he?

17 A. He was with me in that room.

18 Q. Did you see another prisoner by the name of Senad Muslimovic?

19 A. Yes. He was also with me in that room.

20 Q. Do you recall these persons being called out and brought back to

21 the room?

22 A. Yes. One day, the two of them were called out, and when they came

23 back, they were unconscious. Beganovic had a big cut on his head. It was

24 terrible. They were in very bad shape.

25 Q. What was the condition of Mr. Senad Muslimovic?

Page 6272

1 A. Senad was also covered in bruises. He was black.

2 Q. Who called them out and brought them in?

3 A. He was called out by the guard, and the guard brought them back.

4 Q. During your detention, did you observe guard shifts in the camp?

5 A. Yes, we knew the shifts, there was Krkan's shift, Ckalja's shift,

6 and Krle's shift.

7 Q. Why did you name the shifts with the names of these persons?

8 A. Because they were the shift leaders.

9 Q. Did you see this person by the name of Krkan in the camp?

10 A. Yes. Yes, I did.

11 Q. Where did you see him often?

12 A. We would see him at the pista, then through the glass window in

13 the administration building; all over the camp.

14 Q. How was he dressed?

15 A. In a police uniform.

16 Q. Did he carry any arms?

17 A. He did.

18 Q. How would you describe this person when you saw him in the camp?

19 A. He was shortish. He had a thick head of hair, and he had a rather

20 big stomach. He was short in height.

21 Q. Did you know him before the camp?

22 A. Very slightly.

23 Q. Did you know as to what he did before the camp, as to what his

24 employment was?

25 A. He was also a policeman.

Page 6273

1 Q. Now, you mentioned a person by the name of Krle, or a shift by

2 that name. Did you see any person by that name?

3 A. I did.

4 Q. Did you see that person -- what did you see? What he was doing

5 when you saw him in the camp?

6 A. He was walking, moving back and forth. I don't know what he was

7 doing, but he was on the move.

8 Q. Moving to --

9 A. Moving around the camp.

10 Q. -- to which place? Where did he go to, could you observe? Did

11 you observe?

12 A. He went to the hangar, to the administration building, the

13 restaurant, to the "white house." They went everywhere. That was their

14 job. That was their working place.

15 Q. Other than walking about, did you see them giving orders to any of

16 the guards or being engaged in any other functions?

17 A. I couldn't hear what he was saying, but it was normal that he

18 would issue orders to the guards. That's what he was meant to do.

19 Q. Now, when you saw him, how was Krle dressed?

20 A. Krle also wore a police uniform.

21 Q. Could you describe him as to how he looked when you saw him in the

22 camp?

23 A. He was tall, with black hair and a longish face.

24 Q. Did you know his real name?

25 A. No. I hadn't known him from before.

Page 6274

1 Q. Did you know the real name of Mr. -- the person whom you call as

2 Krkan?

3 A. I did. Mladjo Radic.

4 Q. You said that -- I'm going back to the persons whom you testified

5 to, about Emir Beganovic and Senad Muslimovic, you said about the

6 conditions when they were brought back, saying that it was terrible; but

7 before they left the room, what was their condition? How did they look?

8 Did you see them?

9 A. They were in a better condition, even though they had already been

10 beaten up, but they were in a better condition when they brought them

11 back. When they brought them back, they were in a terrible condition.

12 Q. Witness, did you see prisoners -- during your detention, did you

13 see prisoners being taken for interrogations?

14 A. Yes. There were interrogations every day, from eight till five.

15 Q. Where was these interrogations held or conducted?

16 A. The interrogations were conducted in the administration building,

17 in the offices upstairs.

18 Q. Do you know who conducted these interrogations?

19 A. Inspectors did.

20 Q. Do you know any names of these people?

21 A. Yes, I do.

22 Q. Please.

23 A. Drago Meakic, Obrad Despotovic, Lakic, Rade Knezovic, Neso Babic

24 Neso Tomic, Zoric.

25 Q. Were they in the camp, or did they come from outside?

Page 6275

1 A. They came every morning in a small bus to the camp and, after the

2 interrogations, they left the camp.

3 Q. Now, when these interrogations were being conducted, were you all

4 able to hear what was taking place in these rooms?

5 A. We couldn't hear. When I was in that same building, in a room

6 below, you could hear the noise and the beating occasionally. But when I

7 was in the hangar end of the pista, I couldn't hear.

8 Q. You said that you were in the room in the same building. Did you

9 see --

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. -- any prisoners being brought after the interrogations?

12 A. Many persons were brought after interrogations, but one person I

13 remember well. Pezo Camil passed away half an hour after he was brought

14 back from the interrogations.

15 Q. What was the condition of Pezo Camil, of the others -- or the

16 others after they were brought back from the interrogation?

17 A. Some were brought back to the same room, some were brought back in

18 a normal state, and some in a very poor state, and others were taken to

19 other rooms.

20 Q. Could you describe how -- you say poor state. Could you describe?

21 A. Many that were brought back were black and blue, beaten up,

22 beaten.

23 Q. Now, about Pezo Camil, the person whom you referred to, were you

24 able to see him clearly?

25 A. Yes, clearly, because he was right next to me. About five metres

Page 6276

1 away is where he lay.

2 Q. What was his condition? You said that he passed away after 30 --

3 after a half an hour.

4 A. After half an hour, he passed away. He was in a dreadful

5 condition after interrogation. He couldn't come down on his own. They

6 carried him down in a blanket after the interrogations.

7 Q. Now, Witness, other than these interrogations, do you recall any

8 guards calling out names of prisoners in the night?

9 A. Every night. There wasn't a night when someone didn't come to

10 call out detainees in all the rooms.

11 Q. What happened after they were called out? Were they returned to

12 the rooms?

13 A. Unfortunately, many of them did not come back.

14 Q. The people who came back, did you see as to what conditions they

15 were in?

16 A. They were also in a terrible condition. I remember Nedzad Seric,

17 the president of the court, who was unconscious when he was brought back.

18 He is missing, too, today.

19 Q. To which ethnicity did this Nedzad Seric belong to?

20 A. He was of Muslim ethnicity.

21 Q. And the person whom you referred earlier, Pezo Camil, to which

22 ethnic group did he belong to?

23 A. He was also of Muslim ethnicity.

24 Q. Now, Witness, do you know in which shift these people were called

25 out?

Page 6277

1 A. I'm afraid I couldn't say. I don't know, and I cannot claim

2 anything.

3 Q. Did it occur on all shifts?

4 A. In all shifts, these call-outs occurred.

5 Q. Were you interrogated when you were detained in the camp?

6 A. I was, twice.

7 Q. Who took you for interrogation, and who interrogated you?

8 A. I was taken out by a guard for interrogation. Neso Babic and Neso

9 Tomic interrogated me.

10 Q. What did they ask you about? What did they question you about?

11 A. They asked whether I was a member of a party, whether I got

12 weapons, where I was, what I did. That was the kind of thing they asked

13 me.

14 Q. Did they -- what was your reply?

15 A. I said that I never delved in politics, that I did my job.

16 Q. Were you beaten during the interrogations?

17 A. They didn't beat me because I had dysentery and lost 32 kilograms

18 in the camp in barely two months. I was in a pitiful state.

19 Q. For how long were you detained in Omarska?

20 A. From the 30th of May to the 6th of August. After the 6th of

21 August, on the Thursday afternoon, I was transferred to Manjaca.

22 Q. How long did you stay in Manjaca?

23 A. I stayed there until the 17th of December, 1992.

24 Q. When you left these camps, what was your condition? What was the

25 condition of your health?

Page 6278

1 A. When I left Manjaca, I can say that my condition was good. We

2 were taken over by the Red Cross at Manjaca and received all the medicines

3 and food we required.

4 Q. What was the overall condition of your health? What could you

5 say?

6 A. Well, my health was impaired then and my life destroyed, and that

7 is something that I can never get back, what I went through and my family

8 went through and everybody else. That cannot be made up for, repaid in

9 any way.

10 Q. What did you do with your house and property that you had in

11 Prijedor?

12 A. My house was set fire to. I didn't find any of my property. My

13 catering establishment is still working in Prijedor. A Serb has it now.

14 Q. Now, before we get to -- go further, Witness, bear with me. I

15 will ask you again a question with regard to the prisoners being taken out

16 or were called out on all three shifts. When they returned -- you said

17 some were returned. Did you see their conditions after they were called

18 out?

19 A. Those who returned had also been beaten up in all sorts of ways,

20 and they were brought back in a very difficult state, serious condition.

21 Q. Do you know during which shift Pezo Camil was called out for

22 interrogations and returned?

23 A. I can't claim that. I don't know that.

24 Q. You mentioned another person by the name of Nedzad Seric?

25 A. Yes, the former president of the court of Prijedor.

Page 6279

1 Q. You said that you saw him beaten.

2 A. I did.

3 Q. Was it after the interrogations or was it during the night that he

4 was called out?

5 A. It was during the night. Nedzad Seric, that was during the night.

6 Q. He was called out in the night and returned beaten; is that

7 correct?

8 A. That's right, yes.

9 Q. Thank you. Witness, although eight years have passed, will you be

10 able to, if you see the person whom you referred to as Miroslav Kvocka, if

11 you see him today in court, will you be able to identify him?

12 A. I hope I would.

13 Q. After you left the Omarska camp, have you seen Mr. Kvocka in the

14 media or at any other instance?

15 A. I did not.

16 Q. Will you please look around court and see whether you could

17 identify the person Miroslav Kvocka.

18 A. I can. Miroslav Kvocka is sitting in the back row. He's the

19 third from the policeman. The man next to him, and then Miroslav Kvocka.

20 He's got a blue jacket, a grey shirt, and a tie.

21 Q. If you need, you can please get up. Could you kindly say in which

22 row, please.

23 A. The back row, next to the wall. There he is, over there, in the

24 blue jacket.

25 Q. From the policeman?

Page 6280

1 A. From the policeman, third on the left.

2 MR. WAIDYARATNE: May the record reflect that the witness --

3 A. In the back row.

4 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you.

5 Q. You mentioned a person by the name of Krkan and Mladjo Radic. If

6 you see him, will you --

7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Mr. Waidyaratne, but

8 I think that the assertion was not recorded in the LiveNote.

9 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Very well. Your Honour. May the record reflect

10 that the witness has identified Miroslav Kvocka. Thank you, Your Honour.

11 Q. Witness, you spoke about a person, a shift commander, you said, by

12 the name of Krkan, and his real name Mladjo Radic. If you see him today,

13 will you be able to recognise him?

14 A. I hope I would recognise him, yes.

15 Q. Would you please look around the courtroom and see whether you

16 could recognise him. If you need, you can get up and see.

17 A. I don't have to get up. He's sitting opposite me, in a black

18 jacket, black shirt, by the wall.

19 Q. Which row? Could you kindly state in which row?

20 A. Back row, up against the wall, next to the policeman.

21 Q. You identified Mr. Kvocka. Could you say where Mr. Radic is

22 seated compared from where Mr. Kvocka is seated?

23 A. He's sitting on his right-hand side.

24 MR. WAIDYARATNE: May the record reflect that the witness has

25 positively identified Mr. Mladjo Radic.

Page 6281

1 Q. You also referred to a person by the name of -- a shift commander

2 by the name of Krle. If you see him today, are you in a position to

3 identify him?

4 A. I hope that I would, yes.

5 Q. Will you, if necessary, get up and see around the court and

6 identify this person by the name of Krle.

7 A. Krle's sitting next to Kvocka, on his left and next to the

8 policeman in the back row, up against the wall.

9 Q. Would you kindly tell as to what he's wearing?

10 A. He's wearing a white shirt and a grey jacket.

11 MR. WAIDYARATNE: May the record reflect that the witness has

12 positively identified Krle.

13 That concludes my examination, Your Honour. Thank you.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

15 Mr. Waidyaratne.

16 Perhaps this would be a good moment to take a break, unless the

17 Defence has very few questions to ask, and then perhaps we could go on.

18 Let's hear from Mr. Krstan Simic.

19 Have you got an order for the cross-examination?

20 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we shall be putting

21 our questions in the order of the indictment, and we have a lot of

22 questions to ask.

23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. I think it would be

24 a good idea to take a break now.

25 Mr. Usher, would you lower the blinds and escort the witness out

Page 6282

1 of the courtroom.

2 Witness, we're going to have a break now.

3 A half an hour break.

4 --- Recess taken at 12.40 p.m.

5 --- On resuming at 1.15 p.m.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You may be seated.

7 You may be seated, Witness.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, your witness.

10 Mr. Haskic, you're now going to be answering questions put to you

11 by the Defence counsel.

12 Mr. Krstan Simic, your witness.

13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Cross-examined by Mr. K. Simic:

15 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Haskic. You heard my name,

16 but I'll repeat it. My name is Krstan Simic. I am an attorney from Banja

17 Luka, and together with my colleague Mr. Branko Lukic, an attorney from

18 Doboj, we represent the Defence of Mr. Kvocka.

19 A. I am happy to know you.

20 Q. Mr. Haskic, you already have some experience with the

21 International Criminal Tribunal; is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. More exactly, on the 20th of June, if you recall, 1996, under

24 oath, you testified before the Trial Chamber of the Tribunal; is that

25 correct?

Page 6283

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. The Prosecution and the Chamber informed you on the occasion of

3 the importance of testifying, telling the truth, and the solemn

4 declaration you took on the occasion; is that correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Is it also correct if I say that before this distinguished Chamber

7 of this Tribunal, you told the truth in keeping and in respect of the

8 declaration that you took to -- the solemn declaration and oath you took

9 today?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Haskic. We'll go back to that statement later on.

12 Was Mr. Kvocka arrested?

13 A. I don't know.

14 Q. You never heard any news about Mr. Kvocka through the media, your

15 contacts with friends, and so on?

16 A. No.

17 Q. How did you come to be in a position to contact after testifying

18 in the Tadic case two years ago with the representatives of the office of

19 the Prosecutor?

20 A. They called me.

21 Q. What did they tell you on that occasion?

22 A. They said -- that is to say, they asked me about Kvocka.

23 Q. Was that a telephone contact in December 1998?

24 A. I can't remember when it was.

25 Q. Was it after the Tadic testimony or before?

Page 6284

1 A. It was after.

2 Q. How much time passed after that?

3 A. I couldn't tell you exactly.

4 Q. Mr. Haskic, about the events in Omarska, Prijedor, or in the

5 summer of 1992, did you make any statements to the media or any other

6 official organs?

7 A. No. As far as the media are concerned, as far as I remember, no.

8 Q. Do you know what the media means, the term "media"? Do you know

9 what it refers to?

10 A. I beg your pardon?

11 Q. Is it television, radio, the news?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Thank you. In addition to the OTP and the Trial Chamber in the

14 Tadic case, did you give any other official organs any kind of statement?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Do you remember that that was at the beginning of July in the

17 country of your present residence?

18 A. Yes. I don't know when it was, but yes.

19 Q. Was it before you testified in the Tadic trial, or afterwards?

20 A. It was before.

21 Q. I should like to ask the usher to show you your statement, which

22 is in the B/C/S language.

23 Mr. Haskic, would you take a look at the first page, the title

24 page, in fact. Is it true that it says on this page that the statement

25 was made on the 5th of July, 1994?

Page 6285

1 A. Yes, that's what it says.

2 Q. Is that correct?

3 A. Yes, it is.

4 Q. Would you now turn to page 6 and look at that.

5 A. Page 6 you said?

6 Q. Yes. Does it say there that it is a continuation of the interview

7 of Mr. Haskic started on the 5th of July, and that that was on the 6th --

8 and that it was continued on the 6th of July, 1994?

9 A. Yes, after the interview on the 5th of July.

10 Q. But in the corner, it says the 6th of July, 1994, and it is a

11 continuation of the interview given on the 5th of July, 1994; is that

12 correct?

13 A. Yes, it is.

14 Q. Is it also correct if I say that, after two years following these

15 events, a little under two years after them, on the 5th and 6th of July,

16 1994, you had a conversation with the officials of the country in which

17 you resided at the time?

18 Look at page 1, please. You don't have to read it. We'll go back

19 to the text later on, point by point. You can close the document so that

20 you can concentrate on what I'm asking you.

21 My question is the following: Is it correct when I say that on

22 the 5th and 6th of July, 1994, that is to say, a little less than two

23 years from these unfortunate events, that you talked to the

24 representatives of an official institution? Would that be correct?

25 A. Yes.

Page 6286

1 Q. Thank you. We'll go back to that statement later on. I should

2 now like to go back to the events that you talked about today. You spoke

3 about your family situation and said you had a wife and that your daughter

4 was 11 years old in May 1992; is that correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Where did your wife work?

7 A. She had a company registered in her name. Up until 1987, she

8 worked in my grille.

9 Q. And your daughter went to school?

10 A. Yes. The 16th of May Primary School was its name.

11 Q. How long does the school year last? How long did it last in

12 Prijedor, 1992, the scholastic year and all the other years?

13 A. Well, quite normally -- usually it lasted until July.

14 Q. You said a moment ago that your wife and your 11-year-old

15 daughter, while school was still on, that she went on holiday to Croatia.

16 A. Yes, that's right.

17 Q. How long were they to stay on this holiday?

18 A. Well, until the situation had changed. Perhaps a month. I don't

19 know.

20 Q. Mr. Haskic, was it in fact a holiday, or the departure of your

21 wife and daughter, was it motivated by the events which did not bring

22 anything good with them?

23 A. I agree that they did not bring anything good with them.

24 Q. And do you agree that your wife and daughter left because of the

25 situation?

Page 6287

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Mr. Haskic, what were your motives? Half an hour ago or an hour

3 ago, in a trivial event described to the court, a fact that was not

4 correct, that she had gone on holiday and was not able to return from that

5 holiday.

6 A. She was not able to return.

7 Q. Mr. Haskic, that's not my question. I asked you why, for such a

8 trivial matter, a trivial point, you presented untruthfully the situation

9 to the Court, claiming that your wife had gone off on holiday with your

10 daughter. Why did you say that? Silence is an answer too.

11 Let me move on to --

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, let the

13 witness answer. Give him time.

14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

15 A. I have nothing to say.

16 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Thank you.

18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Simic.

19 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Mr. Haskic, I would like now to go back to the day of your arrest,

21 which is the 30th of May. You testified that the Serb forces that morning

22 launched an attack on Prijedor and that the attack was concentrated on the

23 part of Prijedor called Stari Grad, or Old Town; is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Do you know what was the direct cause of such an attack on the old

Page 6288

1 town and some other neighbourhoods?

2 A. I do not.

3 Q. Thank you. Where were you arrested?

4 A. Where was I arrested? In my part of town.

5 Q. Yes, I know that. But I'm asking more precisely.

6 A. It's in Zagrad.

7 Q. Where were you when the Serb forces arrived?

8 A. After the announcement on the radio and the shouting, we went out

9 into the street spontaneously. All the people left their homes and came

10 out into the streets.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me. Witness, could you

12 get closer to the microphone, please, because the interpreters are having

13 difficulty hearing you. Thank you.

14 A. Thank you. I will.

15 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Regarding your arrest, the place of arrest, the method of arrest,

17 did you testify about all that in the Tadic case?

18 A. I did.

19 Q. And you said you were telling the truth at the time.

20 I should like to ask the usher to provide you with a transcript of

21 your testimony.

22 Could you please turn to page 10. At the bottom of the page, a

23 representative of the Office of the Prosecutor asks you, referring to the

24 Serb forces: "What did they do when they arrived in your part of town?"

25 Is it correct what I'm saying? Is that what it says? And your answer on

Page 6289

1 that occasion was: "They were shooting and they were saying, 'Come out,

2 all of you.'" Is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And there was an announcement on the radio.

5 A. Yes, too.

6 Q. On that occasion, you answered: "Come out all of you. We'll kill

7 you." Is that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Thank you. On that occasion, did you come out spontaneously, as

10 you just told us, or is what you said during the Tadic case to the Trial

11 Chamber correct?

12 A. I don't know how to answer that, whether it was spontaneous or

13 under pressure, under coercion. I don't know how to express myself.

14 Q. Mr. Haskic, a spontaneous exit, can you describe it as spontaneous

15 if somebody is telling you to come out and shooting around and threatening

16 to kill you? Is that spontaneous?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Could you please try and remember which house you were forced out

19 of.

20 A. House?

21 Q. Yes, whose?

22 A. Whose house?

23 Q. Yes, when you were arrested.

24 A. I was forced out of a house.

25 Q. Whose house?

Page 6290













13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the English

14 and French transcripts












Page 6291

1 A. My neighbour's house.

2 Q. Does that house have a garage?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Had you sought shelter in the garage together with other

5 neighbours until they came looking for you?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Thank you. After your arrest -- let us go back to your testimony

8 of July 1994. You can close this transcript and take the one dated the

9 5th of July, 1994.

10 It says that you understood all the instructions and warnings, and

11 that you stated that you wished to testify. Is that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. You said here that the officials who were interviewing you had

14 provided also an interpreter whom you can understand well.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Would you please look at page 4 of this statement. You stated,

17 and you were cautioned then, too, that you need to speak the truth, and

18 I'm quoting, "The Serbs arrived at my house at about 1500 hours." Next

19 page, "The Serbs rang the bell, and I opened the door. The Serbs asked me

20 to go out into the street."

21 A. That's a mistake in the translation.

22 Q. You said over there that you were in the garage, and here you're

23 saying something else.

24 A. This is a mistake in the translation.

25 Q. Let us go back to your arrest. You mentioned Mr. Fuad Ekinovic;

Page 6292

1 is that correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Tell us what happened to Mr. Fuad Ekinovic.

4 A. He was killed. He was lying in the yard when we went.

5 Q. Did you hear shots around your house?

6 A. Yes. There was shooting in the old town. There was shooting all

7 over Prijedor.

8 Q. The Office of the Prosecutor asked you questions about that event,

9 too, and if you look at page 12 of the transcript, of the transcript, this

10 thick document that Their Honours have, the question of the Prosecution

11 was: "As you went through that district, did you notice whether some of

12 your neighbours were perhaps shot on the spot?" Answer, your answer:

13 "Yes, I did. On my right, Fuad Ekinovic was killed in his yard." "Q. So

14 he was still in his yard when he was killed? A. Yes."

15 Is that correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. So now let's go back again to your statement given on the 5th and

18 6th of July, 1994. When you left your house, you said, and I quote, "I

19 could see there how a Serb soldier shot my neighbour Fuad Ekinovic in the

20 head." Is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Did you see, yourself, a Serb soldier killing --

23 A. There was a group of soldiers shooting.

24 Q. Did you see that?

25 A. Yes, they were shooting.

Page 6293

1 Q. Did you see him being shot in the head?

2 A. I didn't see him shot in the head, but there was shooting and he

3 was killed there in the yard. This is 50 metres away from my house.

4 Q. Is it correct to say that, that it is incorrectly stated here when

5 it says, "I could see a Serb soldier shooting my neighbour Fuad Ekinovic

6 in the head"? Did you see it or not?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Thank you. So you reached the high-riser. When did you arrive in

9 Omarska?

10 A. The bus I was in arrived in the evening. Eight, half past eight

11 in the evening, something like that.

12 Q. You were a person, a businessman, moving around Prijedor. Could

13 you tell us along which route you reached Omarska from Prijedor?

14 A. Through Tomasica.

15 Q. Does that take you through Jelicka?

16 A. No, not Jelicka. Tomasica and then the mine. I know that we

17 drove through Tomasica.

18 Q. How many buses were there when you arrived?

19 A. When we arrived in Omarska?

20 Q. Yes.

21 A. I don't know how many. Six or seven, something like that. Six or

22 seven buses. There was a whole column of buses.

23 Q. You testified today that you arrived in the evening of the 30th.

24 Was there anything unusual when you arrived in Omarska?

25 A. What was unusual was that I was put in a bus like livestock and

Page 6294

1 being driven there.

2 Q. I agree, but my question is, was there a state of emergency, or

3 were there some events taking place in Omarska, or did you simply get off

4 the bus and were taken to your rooms?

5 A. When we got off the bus, we were taken out in fours. We had to

6 lean against the wall, and we were searched.

7 Q. And then you entered the room?

8 A. The room, yes.

9 Q. And then you were brought back to the pista; is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Let us try and reconstruct your detention in Omarska. You

12 testified that during the first nine or ten days in Omarska, you spent

13 them on the pista; is that correct?

14 A. Yes. We were on the pista, and then we were taken back to the

15 restaurant to have lunch, and then we were taken to the pista again.

16 Q. Is it correct to say that from the 1st of June until the 9th or

17 10th of June, during the daytime you were at the pista and at night you

18 slept in the restaurant building where food was distributed?

19 A. I couldn't tell you exactly. We spent some time at the pista and

20 we also slept sometimes in the restaurant. We also slept at the pista.

21 Q. So you spent some nights on the pista.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Thank you. After you were moved from the pista, where were you

24 taken?

25 A. For one night in the "white house," then brought back to the

Page 6295

1 pista. Then after that, I was transferred to the hangar, to room number

2 25 or 15, I don't know, but anyway, it was to the right.

3 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher to show the

4 witness Prosecution Exhibit 3/130.

5 Q. [No interpretation]

6 JUDGE RIAD: We have no translation in English.

7 A. [No interpretation]

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [No interpretation]

9 THE INTERPRETER: One, two, three.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Bearing this in mind,

11 Mr. Krstan Simic, perhaps you could repeat your question.

12 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

13 Q. Mr. Haskic, you have in front of you a sketch of the first floor

14 of the hangar building where you were detained. So could you please show

15 us -- if you can't see well, just use the pointer -- the room you were in,

16 and we'll read it out together.

17 A. This was the entrance here. This is the entrance, and I was

18 here.

19 Q. Could you read out the number of that room?

20 A. B8. B8 and B7 is all one room, and B23.

21 Q. How much time did you spend in this area that you call B7, B8, and

22 B23?

23 A. I couldn't tell you. I don't remember.

24 Q. When you were in these premises, how often did you go out during

25 the daytime?

Page 6296

1 A. Only when we went for lunch.

2 Q. How long did that take, your going and coming back from lunch?

3 A. Well, it certainly took about half an hour. We formed a line, we

4 get there, come back. There were several lines. We had to form lines as

5 we went out. Against the wall we were lined up.

6 Q. Are there any windows from these rooms, and, if so, where are they

7 facing?

8 A. There are windows to the left, facing the field down there.

9 Q. You didn't see the "white house"?

10 A. The "white house"?

11 Q. Through the window?

12 A. It could be seen, but you'd have to climb onto something to see

13 it.

14 Q. You couldn't see the pista?

15 A. No.

16 Q. The restaurant building?

17 A. No. Not in the rooms I was in.

18 Q. Thank you. After your detention in this area, B7, B8, and B23,

19 where were you transferred?

20 A. I was taken for interrogation again, and after the interrogation,

21 I was taken to a room next to the restaurant, and that is where I stayed

22 until the end.

23 Q. Could you describe that room for us?

24 A. Well, it's a room that was annexed to the restaurant in the

25 administration building. There was a main entrance and a side entrance.

Page 6297

1 Q. Did that room have a name?

2 A. They called that room Mujo's room, actually.

3 Q. Does that room have any windows?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Where were they? Were they high up?

6 A. They were high up, the windows.

7 Q. Could you see anything through those windows?

8 A. You could see through the entrance because there was a glass

9 door.

10 Q. When you're looking through this glass door, what could you see?

11 A. You could see people coming to the camp, to the left.

12 Q. Did you spend all day in that room? Did you come out of that

13 room?

14 A. We stayed there all day. We went for lunch, and we came back.

15 Then towards the end, we were allowed to go outside on the pista.

16 Q. When you said "towards the end" --

17 A. Towards the end of my detention in Omarska.

18 Q. How long did lunch take when you went from this room?

19 A. Well, again, the lunch itself was quick, but there would be 30 of

20 us, I think, in a line. As one went in, the other had to come out. So

21 this went quickly. But the formation of lines took time, and it took us

22 sometimes half an hour. So I couldn't tell you how long.

23 Q. But roughly how long did all this take?

24 A. Maybe half an hour or 40 minutes, all in all. Something like

25 that. I can't assert with any certainty exactly how long it took.

Page 6298

1 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Usher, we don't need the

2 exhibit any more.

3 Q. Mr. Haskic, allow me to go back to the period when you were at the

4 pista. As you said, this was approximately until the 10th of June. While

5 you were at the pista, did you notice Omarska being visited by any

6 important officials or functionaries, as we call them, of the authorities

7 in Prijedor?

8 A. While I was there, I didn't notice anything, but afterwards, I

9 heard that they did come.

10 Q. Do you know a person called Simo Drljaca?

11 A. I do.

12 Q. While you were at the pista, you never saw him visiting Omarska?

13 A. I did not see him, but I do know Simo Drljaca. I knew him.

14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher to give the

15 witness Prosecution Exhibit 3/81, please.

16 Q. [No interpretation]

17 A. [No interpretation]

18 THE INTERPRETER: "Yes, I did hear that," was the answer. "I did

19 hear that."

20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think we don't have your

21 question.

22 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I'll repeat the question, Your

23 Honour.

24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, please do so.

25 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

Page 6299

1 Q. Mr. Haskic, did you hear from others that Simo Drljaca did visit

2 the Omarska camp?

3 A. Yes, I did.

4 Q. Could you please look at the photograph on the ELMO, please.

5 A. I have looked at it.

6 Q. Do you recognise the person in the photograph with his hand

7 raised?

8 A. I do. That is Simo Drljaca.

9 Q. Thank you. I have to warn you, Mr. Haskic, that you were

10 testifying in the Tadic case under oath. So would you please open page 17

11 of the transcript from those proceedings, your testimony in the Tadic

12 case.

13 I apologise. It is page 23, line 7. The question was by the

14 Prosecution: "Did you ever see Serb officials in Prijedor except the SUP

15 inspectors or former SUP inspectors coming to Omarska?" Your answer was,

16 and I quote: "The chief of the Prijedor SUP, Simo Drljaca, did come."

17 Then came the next question: "How frequently did they come to the Omarska

18 camp?" Your answer: "I don't know." Then the question was repeated.

19 The answer was: "I don't understand the question, I'm sorry."

20 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters do not have this transcript.

21 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. "How frequently did Drljaca come to Omarska?" Then came your

23 answer, listen carefully: "When I was on the pista, I could see them -- I

24 could see him several times when he came to Omarska." "Q. Did you know

25 Mr. Simo Drljaca before the war?" Your answer was: "Yes."

Page 6300

1 And then we leave out a passage, then comes a Prosecution

2 question, line 20: "When you saw him in the Omarska camp, did he come

3 accompanied by somebody outside the camp?" Your answer was: "Yes." The

4 next Prosecution question was: "Who was it?"

5 Can you tell us now, without me reading it out, who was with Simo

6 Drljaca?

7 A. My neighbour, Milovan Milutinovic, an active officer of the JNA

8 army.

9 Q. Would you please look at the photograph. Is he there on the

10 photograph, Colonel Milovan Milutinovic?

11 A. I don't know whether he was a Colonel. Yes, a Colonel perhaps.

12 Yes, he is behind Simo Drljaca.

13 Q. Mr. Haskic, what is the truth; what you just told me under oath a

14 moment ago, that you never saw Simo Drljaca but that you heard about him

15 coming; or is the truth what you described and even showed on the ELMO,

16 identifying Mr. Drljaca and Mr. Milutinovic also under oath in the Tadic

17 case?

18 A. I wouldn't like to answer that question.

19 Q. Very well, thank you. Since we are talking about this issue, you

20 said today that in Omarska you met the husband of your neighbour Jasminka

21 Crnalic, Miroslav Kvocka?

22 A. I didn't meet him. He was in the camp. I couldn't meet him.

23 Q. You also testified under oath today that he was the camp

24 commander; is that correct?

25 A. As far as I know and according to others, he was the camp

Page 6301

1 commander. I don't have any documents showing that he was the commander.

2 Q. I should now like to ask you to kindly go back to your statement

3 under oath, page 24. Please look at it. Line 1, a representative of the

4 OTP asks you: "Did you ever see Simo Drljaca with members of the camp

5 administration?" Your answer: "The commander of the camp, the warden of

6 the camp." Your answer was brief: "Yes."

7 Next question of the Prosecution: "Who was the camp warden?"

8 Answer: "Zeljko Meakic."

9 A. As far as I know, and according to the knowledge of the detainees

10 who were there.

11 [Cannot distinguish between Q and A]

12 Q. Did you say under oath in the Tadic case while you were at the

13 pista, and we've already defined when that was, that the camp warden was

14 Zeljko Meakic, as far as you knew?

15 A. [No audible response]

16 Q. Thank you. Talking about this --

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Keegan.

18 MR. KEEGAN: Your Honour, I'm sorry, I have to object at this

19 point. Defence counsel has several times been, in fact, injecting facts

20 into his or conclusions into his questions which don't exist anywhere in

21 the transcripts, nor has the witness in fact said. I have let the other

22 one slide, but in this instance there is nowhere in that instance that it

23 refers to, "I saw him during the time I was on the pista," which was the

24 question.

25 The point of all of this, Your Honour, is we've been letting this

Page 6302

1 whole line of cross-examination go, but the point of all of this is

2 nowhere has he ever asked the witness, "Did you in fact say that answer?

3 Do you recall giving that specific answer?" Because in fact, as you look

4 at the English version of the transcript from the Tadic case and you look

5 at the transcript of the translation we're getting of Mr. Simic's reading,

6 they're different translations. So the point being, we don't know that

7 what is in the English language is, in fact, what the witness said. It is

8 a translation. And the witness has never been asked, first off, if he

9 actually said that. And so a number of times the witness has said, I'm

10 not answering or I can't answer that. Perhaps it's the nature of the

11 misleading questioning that's going on here.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, your response.

13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I must say I'm rather confused by

14 this objection. My answer is simple. I was repeating the questions that

15 were put with precision by the Office of the Prosecutor and, in my view,

16 there's no controversy there.

17 What I wish to show is that the witness in three different

18 statements about the same events gives diametrically opposed answers, and

19 I should like the Trial Chamber to judge for themselves.

20 I really see no differences in the translation. The answers are

21 so simple that I really don't see what the objection is about.

22 Let me ask the witness whether he really did testify in this way

23 in the Tadic proceedings, so then we'll have to check the transcript.

24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic. Ask your

25 question, and avoid making any inferences and putting words in the

Page 6303

1 witness's mouth, if possible. So please proceed.

2 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Mr. Haskic, did you in the Trial Chamber in the Tadic case state

4 that the warden of the camp was Zeljko Meakic at the time that Mr. Drljaca

5 visited the camp?

6 A. As far as I know, and according to what the detainees knew.

7 Q. Mr. Haskic --

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, I think we

9 shouldn't insist on that matter, with all due respect, because as you

10 know, it is very difficult for this person. The witness said that he had

11 no certificate that would tell him who was the camp commander. We have

12 heard many witnesses here who said there is some confusion. The people

13 are not jurists. When they say somebody was a commander, what they mean

14 very often is that they were responsible people. They had

15 responsibilities. Now you're discussing who was the commander. The

16 witness has already told you that he has no certificate to that effect,

17 but please proceed.

18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with all due respect,

19 I have to say that the witness did not express any such doubt in the Tadic

20 proceedings. He simply said that it was Mr. Meakic.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Put your question if you need to

22 do so.

23 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Mr. Haskic, I'll go back once again to the document of the 5th and

25 6th of July, and in the introductory page there is your statement, and it

Page 6304

1 says, "Yes, I understand Mr. Bacali well, who has been brought as an

2 interpreter, because he speaks my language, and I agree to his being the

3 interpreter." Is that correct? Did you say that?

4 A. Yes. He's an Albanian.

5 Q. But you said that you understood what he was saying.

6 Mr. Haskic, I should now like to ask you to turn to page 9. It is

7 this statement before the inspector.

8 Mr. Haskic, because of the specific features of this part of the

9 examination, would you please give me yes or no answers if possible. On

10 the occasion, you were asked the following question: "Mr. Haskic, do you

11 wish to add anything to what you have said about the Omarska camp -- to

12 what you said in the Omarska camp?" "About." Sorry, "about." And you

13 answered on the occasion: "Yes. I would like to mention a list of the

14 other criminals." And you go on to enumerate 12 persons.

15 Amongst those 12 persons, the name Miroslav Kvocka is not

16 mentioned; is that correct?

17 A. I haven't found that. What page is that on?

18 Q. It's on page 9, towards the end.

19 A. I can't find it.

20 Q. At the bottom of page 9.

21 A. You mean this?

22 Q. Can I take a look at your transcript, please, your copy? That's

23 it. It's even been underlined to make things easier for you.

24 Amongst those persons, do you see the name of Mr. Kvocka?

25 A. No.

Page 6305

1 Q. Thank you. I'd like to ask you once again, without naming names,

2 because this is the cross-examination, whether some -- you said that some

3 other name was the warden of the camp. Just say yes or no.

4 A. According to my knowledge.

5 Q. Very well. But I say, did you quote another name as being the

6 camp warden? Yes or no.

7 A. Yes, but they changed. They weren't always the same.

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I apologise for interrupting.

9 Who was the person that you indicated as commander, Witness? It is I who

10 am asking you. Who was the person whom you mentioned as being the

11 commander?

12 A. Zeljko Meakic -- well, there was the chief of police, the leader,

13 the police commander. I don't know, but according to my knowledge.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well. But you often

15 heard that Zeljko Meakic was the camp commander; is that right?

16 A. Yes.

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.

18 I apologise, Mr. Krstan Simic, for interrupting. Please proceed.

19 Mr. Keegan.

20 MR. KEEGAN: I don't believe that the witness actually answered

21 your question. Your question was: "Who did he name in the statement?"

22 That's not what he answered, I don't believe.

23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] As you know, Mr. Keegan, I

24 haven't got the document. I only attempted -- that is to say, Mr. Krstan

25 Simic asked the witness whether there was another commander, without

Page 6306

1 saying the name, without stating his name, and the answer was to be yes or

2 no, and I think the Trial Chamber would like to know the name of that

3 person, the person that the witness mentioned.

4 Mr. Krstan Simic, can you help me to restate the question? You

5 have the papers, the document.

6 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I can, Your Honour. My

7 question was the following:

8 Q. Did you, on that occasion, in this list, name Mr. Kvocka as the

9 warden of the camp? Yes or no.

10 A. No.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No. That wasn't the question, I

12 don't think, Mr. Krstan Simic. We're laughing here.

13 You said to the witness, mentioning the individuals, you mentioned

14 a camp commander, and then you asked the witness, "Tell us, yes or no,

15 without giving us the name," and I'd like you now to ask for the name of

16 that person. That's what I want to know. I haven't got the document.

17 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. In this conversation, who do you denote as being the commander of

19 the camp?

20 A. Zeljko Meakic and Dragan Prcac.

21 Q. Thank you. I'd like to ask you to move on to page 10. Turn to

22 page 10, please. And I quote: "I personally did not see any crimes

23 committed by these people nor do I know anyone who saw the crimes

24 committed by these people. However, it was generally known in the camp

25 that these people committed crimes."

Page 6307

1 My question now is the following: Mr. Haskic, are you testifying

2 on the basis of your direct knowledge or generally known circumstances?

3 A. No. That would appear that I wasn't in Omarska camp.

4 Q. I asked you a question concerning your decisive statement.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, I think that

6 the question should be formulated in a different way. What I heard was

7 whether the witness testifies on the basis of his personal knowledge or on

8 the basis of what was general knowledge, generally admitted.

9 Now, "if the witness heard," that's the same thing. If the

10 witness heard something, then he shares that general knowledge directly,

11 and I think what you wanted to ask is whether the witness is testifying by

12 hearsay or because he observed what happened. Is that what you wanted?

13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, your approach and my

14 approach differ somewhat. The witness precisely says he did not see the

15 crimes nor does he know other people who saw the crimes committed, but

16 that it was a generally-known circumstance or fact that those people

17 committed crimes. So my question is a twofold question. It has two

18 levels. First: "Are you testifying on the basis of those generally-known

19 facts which you did not see nor do you know people who saw them, and yet

20 you are testifying?"

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I see. I see. Yes. Go ahead

22 now. But just a minute. Mr. Keegan is on his feet.

23 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour. I'm sorry, but this goes back to

24 my previous objection about misleading the witness. These things are

25 being read in different translations. We're referring to different

Page 6308

1 documents. The statement very clearly says, at least in the translation,

2 "I did not see crimes committed by these people," meaning the people

3 specifically listed in the statement. It doesn't indicate that he didn't

4 see any crimes in the camp himself directly. He's referring in the

5 statement specifically to the people he lists. So again it is a

6 completely misleading question by this counsel.

7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Mr. Krstan Simic, your

8 response?

9 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I accept the

10 suggestion made, and we can limit the question to these people.

11 Q. Can you tell us in respect to these people? Can you answer the

12 question, please?

13 A. Could you repeat the question.

14 Q. The question was as follows: Did you personally see or hear or

15 know people who know that these people committed any crimes?

16 A. I cannot claim that when I don't know, but I can ask where all the

17 people disappeared to in Omarska.

18 Q. Mr. Haskic, during your testimony that we discussed a moment ago,

19 do you remember stressing, "I should once again like to stress that I will

20 state only that which I experienced myself and saw myself. I will try not

21 to mix this up with the tales told by others or information via the

22 media." Is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. In your testimony before the Trial Chamber in the Tadic case, did

25 you say that you personally did not see any crimes?

Page 6309

1 A. I didn't see any killings, but I saw people who -- who -- who were

2 beaten, coming back to the rooms.

3 Q. Let's go back to Mr. Kvocka. I want to ask you, did you ever see

4 Mr. Kvocka kill anybody?

5 A. No. No, I can't claim that.

6 Q. That he beat up anybody?

7 A. No, I did not.

8 Q. That he abused somebody on a religious, ethnic, or other basis?

9 A. No, I did not, and I don't claim to have seen something that I

10 didn't see or hear.

11 Q. Mr. Haskic, did you personally see Mr. Kvocka at any time be

12 present personally and attend a killing, ill-treatment of someone, his

13 abuse, physical or verbal?

14 A. No, I was not present.

15 Q. Did you see him?

16 A. I saw him in the camp. I can claim that.

17 Q. I asked you whether you saw him present when a killing,

18 mistreatment, or abuse of any kind was taking place.

19 A. I did not.

20 Q. I should like now to go back to your testimony today. You said at

21 one point that you saw Mr. Kvocka issuing orders, but that you didn't hear

22 the contents of those orders, and that they issued those orders because

23 they were positioned to issue orders; is that correct?

24 A. Yes, that's quite normal. I didn't issue orders to the guards.

25 Q. Which order did you hear personally Mr. Kvocka issue?

Page 6310

1 A. Well, I couldn't hear because I wasn't standing next to him. How

2 could I hear the order?

3 Q. Who put him in a position to issue orders?

4 A. Well, I would like to know that, too.

5 Q. But did anybody appoint him?

6 A. I don't know.

7 Q. Well, how do you know they were orders if you couldn't hear

8 anything?

9 A. What did you say?

10 Q. How did you know they were orders when you didn't hear what was

11 actually being said?

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, the witness

13 said that he did not hear; he saw. Ask the witness what he saw, what he

14 concluded, what made him conclude that it was an order.

15 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Do you know what position Kvocka held in the Omarska camp at all?

17 A. He was in some leading position.

18 Q. How do you know?

19 A. Well, how do I know? How can I explain how I know?

20 Q. Did you see him give orders to the interrogators?

21 A. No, I did not.

22 Q. Did you see him give orders to the guards?

23 A. Well, he would tour the guards. He was there. I didn't issue

24 orders to the guards; he ordered the guards.

25 Q. But what did he order them?

Page 6311

1 A. Well, how could I hear?

2 Q. How do you know he was issuing orders --

3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic, I have to

4 interrupt you again. The witness said twice at least that he did not hear

5 the orders. Do not insist upon that point, please. Move on.

6 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. But afterwards

7 the witness said that he gave orders.

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon, I suggested

9 that you ask the pertinent question, but you did not ask it. The

10 suggestion that I made, Mr. Krstan Simic, was to ask the witness what he

11 saw and what led him to conclude that he was issuing orders. There we

12 have it. If you don't want to ask that question, ask another question.

13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. You said you knew the family of the wife of Mr. Kvocka. Who did

15 she have, what brothers and sisters?

16 A. She had a wonderful brother who died before the war, his name was

17 Celo, and she has three other brothers.

18 Q. Do you know their names?

19 A. I can't remember.

20 Q. Did you know them?

21 A. Yes, of course I knew them.

22 Q. Did you see them around while you were on the pista in Omarska?

23 A. I saw two of them in the greenhouse [sic] when we went for lunch.

24 In the "glass house."

25 Q. When was that, approximately?

Page 6312

1 A. I can't remember when. I couldn't give you a specific date.

2 Q. Did you see Kvocka during lunch all the time that you were in

3 Omarska?

4 A. With interruptions. I can't tell you exactly. With

5 interruptions.

6 Q. You couldn't see him every day?

7 A. No, I could not. Of course I couldn't.

8 Q. But you would see him from time to time until your departure; is

9 that right?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. I should like now to go back to an event that you described

12 relative to Slavko Ecimovic.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Can you focus on this in relation to your arrival: How many days

15 later was Slavko brought to Omarska?

16 A. I couldn't say exactly. It was in June or the beginning of July,

17 but I couldn't tell you precisely.

18 Q. You testified that he was seriously injured?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. You also testified that an ambulance belonging to the army brought

21 him, alive, injured from Omarska?

22 A. Yes, took him.

23 Q. Could you tell us how much time went by since his arrival in

24 Omarska and his -- when he was put into the vehicle?

25 A. I cannot.

Page 6313

1 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Your Honour.

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Waidyaratne.

3 MR. WAIDYARATNE: The witness didn't testify to the fact that,

4 that Slavko Ecimovic was brought to the camp in an ambulance. The

5 question, it says, "You also testified that an ambulance belonging to the

6 army brought him, alive, injured from Omarska."

7 I don't know whether the interpreter or the transcript -- the

8 witness did not testify. He said that he saw him being taken out in an

9 ambulance.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic. There's a

11 problem with the transcript or perhaps the question. Would you like to

12 rephrase the question? I think I heard it.

13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the witness

14 testified that one day during the day -- that is to say, this morning he

15 testified that a military vehicle came with the first aid sign, and that

16 that vehicle took from Omarska Slavko Ecimovic. There's no doubt there.

17 A. Yes.

18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] [No translation].

19 MR. WAIDYARATNE: The transcript said he was brought. The

20 transcript said Ecimovic was brought to the camp in an ambulance. That's

21 why I objected, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So with that clarification,

23 Mr. Krstan Simic, you may proceed.

24 I should like to take advantage of this interruption to ask you

25 how much longer you need, or shall we break here?

Page 6314

1 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I think that I'm drawing to a

2 close, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Please continue.

4 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Mr. Haskic, on the 5th and 6th of July, 1994, you talked at length

6 to the police inspector, and on no occasion did you mention Mr. Kvocka; is

7 that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You testified here and also before the Trial Chamber in the Tadic

10 trial, and you made no mention of Mr. Kvocka there, either, at any time;

11 is that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Can you explain to us what the reason -- or what information you

14 received that the individual under the name of Kvocka was never mentioned

15 and that somebody was -- wanted you to testify about Kvocka after his

16 arrest?

17 A. Do you want to say that Kvocka wasn't in Omarska?

18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Can I answer, Mr. President?

19 Q. No, Mr. Haskic, I don't want to say that Mr. Kvocka was not in

20 Omarska. We're talking about something else here.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Witness, could you answer the

22 question that counsel has asked you, and the question was why in the Tadic

23 case you made no mention of Kvocka. I think the answer is a simple one,

24 so please answer.

25 A. She didn't ask me.

Page 6315

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] There you have the answer,

2 Mr. Simic; nobody asked him. So go on to the next question, please. Move

3 on.

4 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. My next question with respect to the -- is with respect to the

6 conversation (redacted). You wanted on that occasion to state the names

7 yourself, and you enumerated them, and you did not mention Mr. Kvocka

8 then. Why?

9 A. I didn't remember to.

10 Q. It was only two years after the events.

11 A. That doesn't matter.

12 Q. Mr. Haskic, you were a rich man before, well off?

13 A. Well, I let others decide that.

14 Q. Did you lose everything in this unfortunate war?

15 A. I lost everything apart from one catering establishment. I hope

16 it's still there.

17 Q. Did your wife lose a brother in this war?

18 A. She did.

19 Q. Do you feel any bitterness in your soul because of everything that

20 you experienced and went through, all your sufferings and everything you

21 lost?

22 A. I have bitter disillusionment, and my life has been destroyed

23 through everything I have lived through.

24 Q. Is that a reason for you in the course of your testimonies, with

25 this bitterness that you feel, that people whom you think to be

Page 6316

1 responsible, that you should accuse them of things?

2 A. I'm not accusing anybody. I just say what -- I'm just saying what

3 I know. It is up to the Court to decide who is guilty and who is not.

4 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no

5 further questions.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Krstan Simic.

7 So now we can have the break. I see that the usher has left.

8 Perhaps we have to wait for him. Ah, here he is, or maybe we need a

9 replacement.

10 Could the usher please lower the blinds and accompany the witness

11 out of the courtroom, please.

12 So, we're going to have a break until 3.35, more or less.

13 --- Luncheon recess taken at 2.36 p.m.













Page 6317

1 --- On resuming at 3.35 p.m.

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated.

3 Mr. Usher, may we have the witness shown in.

4 Yes. Mr. Haskic, have you had a chance to have something to eat?

5 A. Yes -- no. No.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No?

7 A. No.

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You haven't had anything to

9 eat?

10 A. I had an apple.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Very well. But at any

12 rate, are you able to continue?

13 A. I'll try.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Fine.

15 I think that we have Mr. Nikolic now.

16 MR. NIKOLIC: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Yes, but this Defence

17 team and the other Defence teams will not be cross-examining this

18 witness.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Does that mean it's finished?

20 You had a very good lunch, I see, very good luncheon. And you all agree

21 on that. Very well. Thank you.

22 Mr. Waidyaratne, do you have any additional questions?

23 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.

24 Re-examined by Mr. Waidyaratne:

25 Q. Witness, I would first start with the cross-examination conducted

Page 6318

1 by the learned counsel for Mr. Kvocka when he asked you -- when he asked

2 you about your wife and child being sent in the month of May.

3 Did you send them away in the month of May?

4 A. They went at their own initiative and ...

5 Q. And were they able to return after that?

6 A. They weren't.

7 Q. Why couldn't they return?

8 A. They couldn't come back because of the situation that happened.

9 Q. And it was suggested, more or less inferred that you lied to the

10 Court. Did you lie to the Court with regard to that aspect?

11 A. No.

12 Q. The next point which I would draw your attention: Today when you

13 testified, you said ...

14 MR. WAIDYARATNE: I would, Your Honour, quote page 43, lines 19

15 and 20.

16 Q. You stated that you heard from others that Kvocka was the

17 commander of the camp for a time. What do you mean by that? What did

18 you -- could you explain as to what you meant by that?

19 A. What I meant. Well, he was some sort of higher authority than an

20 ordinary guard.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic, your

22 objection?

23 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I do have an objection, yes. My

24 learned colleague is asking something specific. He says, "You heard that

25 Mr. Kvocka was the camp commander," and what did you have in mind? He is

Page 6319

1 asking for a conclusion on the basis of something the witness said he

2 heard, and we know what "to hear" means. He did not conclude anything.

3 He heard. He was stating what he heard.

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne, your response.

5 MR. WAIDYARATNE: It was a specific. I quoted the lines in his

6 testimony in the direct examination. The witness referred to that. He

7 said that. That's what I said and quoted the lines, page 43, lines 19 and

8 20, and what I wanted was for him to explain. I put that to him.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne, ask the witness

10 what were the precise terms that he heard.

11 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Very well.

12 Q. Witness, what did you hear of Mr. Kvocka as to what he was in the

13 camp?

14 A. I heard that he was a sort of commander of the police. I don't

15 know. There were several commanders there. I don't know. I had nothing

16 in writing for being able to claim exactly.

17 Q. Was it for some time that he was the commander?

18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Krstan Simic.

20 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the witness said that

21 he heard that he was a police commander. He doesn't know what he was. He

22 can't claim to do so because he did not know. Then a question followed

23 which was absolutely leading: "Was he a commander?" again, while the

24 witness had explained just a moment ago that he had no knowledge about

25 that except what he heard, and he heard different things at that.

Page 6320

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne, ask the witness

2 whether, on the basis of what he heard, there was a time frame of any

3 kind.

4 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Very well, Your Honour.

5 Q. Witness, from what you heard from the others --

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Microphone, please.

7 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Sorry, Your Honour.

8 Q. From what you heard from the other detainees, was there any time

9 frame or any period that he was the commander?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Could you explain?

12 A. I don't know the time period, but for a time he was. After that,

13 I don't know whether he was or wasn't.

14 Q. Was it at the beginning?

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. WAIDYARATNE: May the witness be shown Exhibit 3/81 which was

17 shown by the Defence, Your Honour.

18 Q. Witness, please look at the photograph which is on the ELMO. You

19 see that there is a person in uniform in the front.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Do you know what position he held during that time?

22 A. According to what I learnt, he was the head of SUP, the chief of

23 police. I don't know what term to use, how to express myself.

24 Q. Now, the uniform that he is wearing, a camouflage uniform, have

25 you seen that uniform?

Page 6321

1 A. It's a camouflage uniform.

2 Q. Is it a military uniform?

3 A. I couldn't say. I don't know. I can't claim that.

4 Q. Is it the kind of uniform which is worn by the military personnel?

5 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic.

7 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] The witness has said decisively

8 that he does not know that type of uniform, that it's a camouflage

9 uniform, but that he does not know who it belongs to.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Waidyaratne, ask the

11 witness what type of uniform that is.

12 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you.

13 Q. What type of uniform is that?

14 A. Whether it was a police or for the special units or whatever, I

15 can't say.

16 Q. Did you see the soldiers wearing that uniform?

17 A. There were uniforms like that, and there were other uniforms too,

18 so that there were different types of uniform.

19 Q. Now, Witness, you were asked about the time that you were taken

20 out when you were in the room in the restaurant building. You said that

21 you were taken out for meals. How long would you stay in the pista when

22 you go out after the meals?

23 A. We would stay on the pista until the evening.

24 Q. And in the night were you sent back, ordered back to the

25 restaurant building?

Page 6322

1 A. Yes. They would take us to the restaurant building from time to

2 time.

3 Q. Now, Witness, you, in the direct examination, mentioned about a

4 person by the name of Slavko Ecimovic and you seeing him in the camp. To

5 what nationality did he belong to?

6 A. He was -- according to what I knew was that he was a Croat, a

7 Catholic.

8 Q. And when you saw him, what condition was he in?

9 A. When I saw him in the "white house," he was in a pitiful state.

10 Q. Before that, when you saw him for the first time when he was

11 brought into the camp, what condition was he in?

12 A. He was beaten up. His hands and legs were tied, and he had some

13 wire across his mouth, and he was only able to move very slowly 'cause his

14 feet were tied.

15 Q. You were also questioned about -- first I will deal with the

16 previous time when you gave evidence. In that trial, what was the main

17 focus in that trial and the line of questioning that you underwent in that

18 trial?

19 A. The first trial, you mean?

20 Q. Yes.

21 A. It was the general situation; how I was in the camp, what I

22 experienced, what I went through.

23 Q. Was your testimony focused on a particular individual?

24 A. Well, I can't answer that, really.

25 Q. Do you know who was charged in that case, in that trial?

Page 6323

1 A. Yes, I do.

2 Q. Who was that?

3 A. Dule Tadic, Dusko, Dule.

4 Q. And also, Witness, when you were questioned by another authority

5 in another country and when you gave a statement, was that also focused on

6 that investigation, the same person?

7 A. It was general --

8 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Krstan Simic.

10 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] The question is a leading one

11 because the witness is being asked whether you were focused on the same

12 person, and the witness is being led in his answer. And we presented the

13 whole scan of questions about which the witness spoke.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne.

15 MR. WAIDYARATNE: I will rephrase my question, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Rephrase your question.


18 Q. During that investigation in another country when you gave a

19 statement, were you questioned about a particular individual?

20 A. I can't remember.

21 MR. WAIDYARATNE: If you'd bear with me, Your Honour

22 [Prosecution counsel confer]

23 MR. WAIDYARATNE: May I have the assistance of the usher to have

24 the transcript be given to the witness, Your Honour, from the Tadic

25 trial. I would mark it as 3/153. The translation in B/C/S would be "B"

Page 6324

1 and the English copy would be "A".

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne, I don't know if

3 you were here yesterday or the day before when we discussed this matter of

4 exhibits marked for identification. What we decided -- the ruling was of

5 the 4th of July -- was that preliminary statements were given to the

6 Prosecutor and the transcripts should be utilised but not admitted into

7 evidence. So the question was whether or not to assign a number, whether

8 or not to assign a number to a document that won't be admitted.

9 So you can use documents in order to clarify any contradictions or

10 to test the credibility of the witness, but these documents are not going

11 to be admitted, that is to say, tendered. So you can use the document and

12 therefore we don't need it to be marked for identification as an exhibit.

13 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Very well, Your Honour. I will show the

14 document to the witness and only use it, but I was thinking of as Defence

15 tried to show a contradiction or a difference in a certain portion of the

16 evidence which was given by the witness in the Tadic trial, but as they

17 did not, at least in fairness to the witness and the Court, to have this

18 previous testimony admitted. That was my intention.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well. You can put

20 your additional questions using the same document to clarify matters, to

21 elucidate them. You have the legitimate right to do so, but just using

22 the document.

23 And I take advantage of the occasion to say that I think that the

24 parties are fully aware of this. There are sometimes some small

25 differences that can arise in translation, and the Trial Chamber pays due

Page 6325

1 respect to that. There are things that are not conclusive. There can be

2 differences in translations. So we must pay attention to that and bear

3 that in mind.

4 Having said that, you can show the document and ask your

5 questions, Mr. Waidyaratne.

6 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you, Your Honour. May I have the

7 assistance of the usher to have the English portion to be kept on the

8 ELMO, Your Honour.

9 Q. I refer to the transcript in the Tadic trial, Your Honour, page

10 1959, on the 20th of June 1996. Under cross-examination, were you asked a

11 question to this effect:

12 "Q. When you told the court this morning about moving down

13 your own street and there you saw your house on fire, did

14 that happen?" Your answer was:

15 A. Yes."

16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne, this is a

17 recommendation for both you and the Defence: When you are reading a text,

18 please read slowly for us to be able to get a good interpretation. If you

19 read it too quickly, the interpreters who do not have a text can have

20 difficulties. So please read slowly and then we'll get the proper

21 translation.

22 MR. WAIDYARATNE: I apologise, Your Honour.

23 Q. "Q. Did you see Fuad Ecimovic being shot or did you just see

24 his body?" Your answer:

25 A. As we were walking, I heard firing, and we were passing

Page 6326

1 by the house. I saw him lying dead" --

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon. I see an

3 objection from Mr. Krstan Simic.

4 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm afraid that my

5 learned colleague is leading the witness again. The Defence did not

6 contest this text at all at any moment, but it indicated the contradiction

7 between this text and the statement given by the witness to the police

8 inspector in the state in which he now resides -- in which he resides, and

9 it seems to me that he wishes to show that what was said in Tadic, that

10 there wasn't any contradiction. The contradiction refers to the previous

11 statement of 1994.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne.

13 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Your Honour, with the use of this transcript,

14 the Defence tried to show that the witness has contradicted himself with

15 the statement that he has given under cross-examination. But Defence did

16 not show that under cross-examination that this witness clarified that

17 position and cleared himself.

18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please proceed with the

19 question, Mr. Waidyaratne.

20 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you.

21 Q. The question to you, under cross-examination, was:

22 "Q. Did you see Fuad Ecimovic being shot or did you just see

23 his body?"

24 A. As we were walking, I heard firing and we were passing by

25 the house. I saw him lying dead by the house."

Page 6327

1 Do you recall giving this evidence?

2 A. Yes.

3 MR. WAIDYARATNE: That's all, Your Honour. Thank you.

4 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic.

6 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my learned colleague

7 has broached a new subject and, with your permission, I would like to ask

8 two questions to the witness. An issue was raised which was not raised

9 during the cross-examination or the examination-in-chief.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] There is nothing new here. We

11 are not going to allow you to ask the question. The issue had already

12 been mentioned during the cross-examination. I'm now going to give the

13 floor to my colleague, Judge Riad.

14 Questioned by the Court:

15 JUDGE RIAD: Mr. Haskic, good afternoon. Can you hear me?

16 A. Yes.

17 JUDGE RIAD: I have a very limited number of questions, and you

18 will go back to your lunch quickly.

19 Now, you mentioned that --

20 A. Thank you.

21 JUDGE RIAD: -- you saw Slavko Ecimovic brought to the camp, hands

22 and feet tied and a wire across the mouth, and Kvocka told you, "Look at

23 Tudjman's fighters; you will all end up like him." That was what you

24 said.

25 Good. Now, first I want to know, was Kvocka receiving the

Page 6328

1 detainees? Was he the one bringing in the detainees, receiving them and

2 giving them a lecture, or what?

3 A. I don't know that. As far as I know, he didn't. They would be

4 taken upstairs to the upper floor for interrogation.

5 JUDGE RIAD: So what was -- I want to know the event exactly, the

6 incident, how he came to give you this, this message that you'll end up

7 like Slavko Ecimovic?

8 A. No, not me. There were 1.000 of us on the pista. He didn't say

9 that to me directly, but to all of us. He was addressing all of us, and I

10 happened to be sitting on the pista. He simply said, "Look at this

11 Tudjman's soldier."

12 JUDGE RIAD: He was addressing almost a crowd?

13 A. Yes, not only myself.

14 JUDGE RIAD: Did all the guards address the crowds like that, or

15 only special people?

16 A. I don't quite understand you. What do you mean, if the guards

17 addressed --

18 JUDGE RIAD: Did the guards in the camp just stand up and talk to

19 the crowd and tell them to act like Kvocka?

20 A. We had to listen to the orders that were given by the guards.

21 JUDGE RIAD: I see. Now, when he told you that, you'll all end up

22 like him, did he do anything to stop this, what was happening, to untie

23 the wire around the mouth or anything; or he would just look at it and

24 show it to you?

25 A. No, he didn't try to do anything. At least, I didn't see him do

Page 6329

1 that.

2 JUDGE RIAD: If you can remember, you said that Slavko was lying

3 after that on the floor, moaning and in a pool of blood. Was that almost

4 close by after the -- after Kvocka told you that you will end up like him,

5 or was it several days later?

6 A. I couldn't tell you exactly how long. A couple of days, but I'm

7 not sure.

8 JUDGE RIAD: Was Kvocka there then at that time?

9 A. When Slavko was in the "white house"?

10 JUDGE RIAD: When you saw him in the pool of blood.

11 A. No, I cannot say that. I don't know. I cannot claim that he was

12 there. I don't remember.

13 JUDGE RIAD: You said that every day, or every night, detainees

14 were called out and many did not come back, or some came back in terrible

15 condition, and you said that happened in all shifts.

16 A. Yes.

17 JUDGE RIAD: Was Kvocka sometimes in there?

18 A. No, I don't know that. I cannot claim that.

19 JUDGE RIAD: I think that's all. Thank you very much.

20 A. Thank you, too.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you, Judge Riad.

22 Madam Judge Wald has the floor.

23 JUDGE WALD: I have just one question. In the beginning of your

24 testimony, you recounted the incident Judge Riad referred to where

25 Mr. Kvocka said at the time that Ecimovic was coming through with the

Page 6330

1 wires and hands and legs tied, "Look at Tudjman's fighter; you'll all end

2 up like that," and later on at the very end when you were answering

3 Mr. Simic's questions, when he said, "Did you ever see Kvocka kill or

4 abuse anybody," and you said "no" in the last -- were you, when you were

5 talking about abuse and you said you never saw him abuse anybody, what did

6 you mean by "abuse"? Did you mean just physical abuse, or did you mean

7 verbal or any other kind of abuse?

8 A. I didn't notice him physically abuse anyone, and I wasn't close

9 enough to be able to say that he also verbally abused people. I cannot

10 claim that.

11 JUDGE WALD: But my question, just to make sure you are -- by

12 saying that you never saw him engage in any abuse, you're not counting the

13 story you told us in the beginning about his saying, "Look at Tudjman's

14 fighter; you'll all end up like this"? You don't consider that to be

15 included in the question when you say that he never abused anybody; is

16 that right?

17 A. He said that.

18 JUDGE WALD: Okay, all right.

19 A. That is the way he pronounced it.

20 JUDGE WALD: Okay. I just wanted to make sure that you weren't

21 taking that back. Okay, thanks.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

23 Judge Wald.

24 Mr. Haskic, I, too, have a few questions for you. At the

25 beginning of the attack, or following the attack of the 30th of May, you

Page 6331

1 mentioned certain broadcasts on the radio. What is the link between the

2 fact that you heard those appeals on the radio and the fact that you left

3 your house? What is the relation between these two facts?

4 A. I don't know how to answer that question, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Well, maybe my question is not

6 clear enough.

7 Did you leave the place where you were because you had heard those

8 appeals broadcast over the radio or because you had heard Serb soldiers in

9 the street, ordering you to leave the house?

10 A. We heard them say, "Get out, all of you," but we had also heard

11 appeals broadcast over the radio for us all to leave our houses, and there

12 was a lot of shooting going on. It was terrible.

13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you. I can now ask you

14 another question, or rephrase my previous question.

15 So you heard the appeals over the radio, and then you left the

16 house, and then you heard soldiers in the street, or was it the other way

17 around?

18 A. It all happened at the same time. There were soldiers calling

19 upon us, and also there were those appeals that were broadcast over the

20 radio.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Let me ask you another

22 question. When the Serb soldiers arrived and when they started shouting,

23 when they told you to leave your houses, was there anyone left in any of

24 those houses, or were you already all in the street?

25 A. Well, I think that some people were in the street, but some people

Page 6332

1 were still in their houses.

2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I also have a question regarding

3 something that you said in connection with your wife and son. You said

4 that they had gone on holiday. You said that they had gone on their own

5 initiative. Did you discuss that plan with her before she actually left?

6 A. Yes, I did.

7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What were the reasons that you

8 discussed, you and your wife? What were the reasons for her departure?

9 You said that you had discussed the plan with her before she actually

10 left, so what were the reasons that you mentioned during that discussion?

11 A. Well, the situation was already very difficult.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Did you have any problems

13 with telling other people about the reason why she left, or was it easy

14 and simple for you?

15 A. I don't know. On one hand it was easier for me, the fact that

16 they had left; but then it was also more difficult.

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, but when you talked about

18 that to your friends, your acquaintances, your relatives, did you tell

19 your friends that you were afraid, that the situation was complex and that

20 you were afraid that something might happen to them; or did you give them

21 some other reasons for her departure?

22 A. Well, I simply couldn't imagine that a thing like that would

23 happen in Prijedor. That is why I didn't want to leave.

24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay, I'm not going to insist

25 any further on this.

Page 6333

1 You made a distinction between what you had said you had seen and

2 what you said you had heard. In all of your answers, did you always --

3 were you always mindful of that distinction, the distinction between "I

4 saw" and "I heard," or were you speaking in general terms?

5 A. I don't know what to say.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Perhaps once again I

7 wasn't clear enough. In one of your testimonies, you said that there was

8 a difference between what you had seen and what you had heard and the way

9 you told us about it. Do you agree with that?

10 A. Yes, I do.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well then. Let me ask you

12 my question then. So each time when a question was put to you, did you

13 bear that distinction in mind? Were you careful to emphasise that you had

14 heard something?

15 A. Well, it depends. When I heard something, I always try to explain

16 that and to mention that.

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. You said

18 that you had heard from others that Kvocka was a camp commander.

19 A. Yes.

20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Who told you that?

21 A. Those were the stories that circulated amongst detainees.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What detainees? The people who

23 were detained where?

24 A. In the Omarska camp. I wasn't able to hear that from any

25 official. Those were the sources that circulated amongst the detainees.

Page 6334

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. But could you

2 perhaps give us a name?

3 A. Name of the people I was with?

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No. Name of an individual who

5 told you that Kvocka was the commander. One individual, perhaps two?

6 A. Well, I don't know. There were many of us detainees, and we

7 talked. There was a huge number of people who were there. Zijad

8 Mahmuljin was there, Camil Pezo, Ziko Crnalic was next to me, Said Besic;

9 many of us.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Do you remember the

11 circumstances in which those individuals told you that? Were you at the

12 pista? Were you locked up in a room? Did you happen to be in the

13 restaurant? Where exactly were you?

14 A. Well, at the pista, in the restaurant.

15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have another

16 question for you. You said that you knew very well Zeljko Meakic and

17 Kvocka when you saw them in the camp. Was there any difference in conduct

18 of Zeljko Meakic and Kvocka?

19 A. I don't know. It's very difficult for me to say that.

20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Let me try again. You said that

21 you had heard that Kvocka was a kind of commander. What exactly did you

22 mean when you said that he was some kind of commander?

23 A. Well, that he was superior to the guards, that he was not a simple

24 guard. I don't know how to express myself.

25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So you're saying that Kvocka was

Page 6335

1 not a guard, that he had a superior rank in respect of the guards. Do I

2 understand you correctly?

3 A. Yes. That was my assumption.

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Let me now ask you a question

5 that I actually wanted Mr. Krstan Simic to ask of you on at least two

6 occasions, but he failed to do that.

7 On what did you base your conclusion that Kvocka was the person

8 who issued orders?

9 A. Well, I couldn't see him directly issuing orders, but I saw that

10 he was there, that he moved around, that he was present in the area, that

11 he was in the camp.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So if I understand you

13 correctly, you made a distinction, and you said that you were not able to

14 hear him give any orders.

15 A. No, I wasn't able to hear that.

16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So what you saw was actually him

17 moving around as if he were the person in charge of giving orders?

18 A. Yes, as if he were the superior.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. But you know that many

20 people -- that there are many people in the camp who walk around, who move

21 around. There may be even certain detainees who were walking around.

22 What is the difference between a person who simply walked around the camp

23 and Kvocka, who looked as if he issued orders? What was the difference?

24 What was it that set Kvocka apart?

25 A. A detainee had to stay in one and the same place. He was not

Page 6336

1 allowed to move without permission given by the guards. He always had to

2 ask for permission if he wanted to go to the restaurant or to the toilet;

3 and he, of course, was free to move around as he pleased.

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you. Was there a

5 difference between Kvocka's movement around the camp and the movement of

6 the guards around the camp?

7 A. Yes, there was a difference. A guard would be assigned to one

8 particular place and his movement was restricted to the place.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Witness. I

10 have no further questions for you. You have answered a number of

11 questions that were put to you by both parties and the Judges. I should

12 now like to thank you for coming here to the Tribunal to testify and to

13 wish you a safe journey back to your place of residence.

14 Now I'm going to ask the usher to lower the blinds and to help you

15 out of the courtroom.

16 [The witness withdrew]

17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Waidyaratne, what's next?

18 MR. WAIDYARATNE: The Prosecution moves to tender into evidence,

19 admit into evidence Exhibit 3/152.

20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you.

21 MR. WAIDYARATNE: Thank you.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, is there any

23 objection?

24 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] No objection, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well then. Exhibit 3/152

Page 6337

1 will be admitted into evidence.

2 Yes, Mr. Keegan.

3 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour. We heard your earlier discussion

4 with my colleague about the admissibility of transcripts. However, we

5 would like, nonetheless, to move for the admission of the transcript of

6 this witness from the Tadic case and also the statement taken by

7 authorities from another state which was used in cross-examination.

8 It is, of course, the experience of everyone here that most legal

9 rules do have exceptions and that it is for a very good reason, and that

10 is because no rule can generally envisage all possible situations.

11 It appears to us that, in this case, Mr. Simic tried to do a very

12 artful job of skirting your ruling about using the statements as

13 admissible evidence for the purpose of establishing contradictions.

14 Instead, he purposely chose not to introduce the statement, but,

15 nonetheless, the total focus of that cross-examination was to imply that

16 this witness was lying to this Chamber, and he attempted to do that by

17 citing repeatedly two supposedly contradictory answers in both the

18 transcript and in the statement, and by doing so, he has not given this

19 Chamber the opportunity to review those -- that statement and transcript

20 for itself to determine if, in fact, there is a contradiction.

21 He also, of course, tried to very artfully cover up any mention of

22 any other accused in this case which appear in those documents, and then

23 when we obviously tried to clarify by use of the transcript, stood up and

24 objected that it was an improper examination.

25 We think that this is exactly the case where transcripts and

Page 6338

1 statements should be admitted so that the Chamber can make its own

2 decision.

3 The problems in these cases is that this kind of examination,

4 while it may work extremely well in a national -- any national court where

5 you're dealing with the same language so that the witness themself has a

6 better opportunity to recall the actual question and answer which they may

7 have given, here the big problem in particular with using the transcripts

8 is we have no idea what question that witness was actually asked in his

9 own language, because both the English -- excuse me, the B/C/S transcript,

10 which counsel was using and which they use in other examinations, are

11 prepared from the English transcript of the trial. So there's absolutely

12 no way of knowing what that witness was actually asked in his own

13 language. So we actually have no way of knowing exactly what it was he

14 was answering. And that's why we think it's the totality of the

15 examination, which is the only clear indicator of whether there's truly

16 contradictions or not, because it's only by looking at the entire

17 testimony that you can tell whether there is really a continuity, that is,

18 a consistency within the testimony.

19 And the perfect example is Mr. Simic chose only to use the direct

20 examination questions with respect to the death of Ecimovic, whereas that

21 very issue was raised on cross-examination and the answers given in the

22 cross-examination are entirely consistent with exactly the way the witness

23 testified today.

24 So that is what we would call, in fact, a very misleading use of

25 that transcript and for the sole purpose of trying to raise the inference

Page 6339

1 of untruthfulness when, in fact, it doesn't exist at all in the whole of

2 the transcript.

3 So we think that there are times when it is appropriate for these

4 prior documents to be admitted. We are mindful of the general rule, but

5 we would respectfully request that the transcript from the Tadic case and

6 the statement taken by the other authorities be admitted so that the

7 Chamber can weigh for itself the consistency, the truthfulness of this

8 witness' testimony. Thank you, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic, Krstan Simic.

10 You probably object.

11 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will be speaking

12 only on my behalf because of certain special characteristics of the case.

13 If Mr. Krstan Simic were alone, defending only his client, he would accept

14 it. However, bearing in mind your ruling, we do oppose the admittance of

15 this exhibit.

16 It is true that I quoted only those elements which point to

17 certain inconsistencies. I think that the objection concerning the

18 translation is somewhat trivial. I don't understand my learned colleague

19 bringing up the issue of translation if we are discussing the issue of

20 commanders of -- of the commander of the camp. We do not have any problem

21 in translation there because it is a very specific term if he says Meakic

22 is a commander of the camp. Today we quoted only certain portions of the

23 transcript which refer to his allegations as regards the superior position

24 of the individuals in question.

25 I think that the Trial Chamber with their questions touched upon

Page 6340

1 the core issues why we heard this witness today. I wanted to point out

2 the inconsistencies, especially in relation to certain banal issues like

3 holiday, death of Mr. Ecimovic, the stories that were circulating about

4 commanders, and so on and so forth. And in the end, we heard for three

5 times -- actually, for four times the way the witness was arrested. One

6 story was given in the country in which he resides, one story was given in

7 the trial of the Tadic case, the third version was given to me, and the

8 fourth one to you, Your Honours.

9 My conclusion is, therefore, that pursuant to your ruling, the

10 exhibit should not be admitted because we had a number of documents which

11 could have been treated as an exception, and I don't think that this one

12 should be treated as an exemption to the general ruling that the Chamber

13 made.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What about other Defence

15 counsel? Do you wish to add anything to this issue? Yes, Mr. Jovan

16 Simic?

17 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we are also opposed to

18 the introduction of the statement and transcript, in keeping with the

19 ruling that we have had.

20 I should like to remind you that in the case of Witness A, we

21 already had a stand, a position, based on the decision not to introduce

22 transcripts and statements as evidence, into evidence.

23 What I'm worried about at the moment is a proper relationship

24 towards my client, for example, and our team, because with the

25 introduction of a statement, which is what the Prosecutor wants to do, our

Page 6341

1 Defence would be in a position of complete inequality. The equality of

2 arms would not be the same.

3 Let me explain why new witnesses are being brought in is that a

4 completely new witness should be introduced, Mr. Haskic -- that Mr. Haskic

5 would be testifying to facts regarding the Prcac case. We received

6 documents that have not been disclosed fully even to the present day, but

7 we did not choose to stress that. And in one sentence in one text, and

8 another sentence -- that is to say, two sentences, Mr. Prcac is mentioned

9 in only two sentences, and on the basis of this scant material, we try to

10 prepare our case. And when the witness was brought out, it turned out

11 that Mr. Prcac was not mentioned at all, so even in the intimations for

12 the cross or anybody here during the trial mentioned him. However, during

13 the -- and during the examination-in-chief, Prcac was not -- Mr. Prcac was

14 not mentioned.

15 Now, if statements were introduced and admitted in a position

16 where we were not able to have a cross-examination or try to do anything

17 with the witness, the Prosecution is attempting to introduce this and then

18 to refer to it later on, at some later stage.

19 I just want to stress that we have had two rulings, and we have

20 had examples, and I don't see why this should be allowed, and we are

21 opposed to it.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Simic.

23 Mr. Stojanovic, could you try not to repeat the previous

24 arguments; otherwise, we're going to overstep our time limit, and we have

25 witnesses waiting.

Page 6342

1 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I just

2 have a few words to say.

3 I think in this concrete case, or we seem to feel this, the

4 Prosecution has been surprised by the newly-arisen situation with the use

5 of their documents exclusively. The Defence did not contribute to this at

6 all. The situation arose, let me repeat, it is -- the documents, it was

7 exclusively the documents that the Prosecution had in its possession

8 before which led to this situation. But I do not think that we should

9 deviate from the ruling that has been made in this instance. Thank you.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] With respect to Mr. Kos's

11 Defence, counsel does not wish to intervene, I take it? Mr. Nikolic?

12 Mr. O'Sullivan.

13 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Yes, Your Honour, we're assuming that your ruling

14 from July is the ruling of the Chamber, that the procedure you designed

15 based on our submissions at that time was that, for impeachment purposes,

16 the relevant passages would come into the record, and that was the

17 mechanism that's been used.

18 Our whole position during oral submission was that prior

19 out-of-court statements are admissible for a limited purpose of showing

20 impeachment and not for the truth of their contents. And I believe your

21 decision was designed to achieve that, have that portion where we say the

22 contradiction exists, which is a matter for Your Honours ultimately, that

23 is read into the record and becomes a part of the record.

24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I don't know if my colleagues

25 are going to ask any questions. I have a question for the Defence, but

Page 6343

1 Mr. Fila first.

2 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we discussed this

3 yesterday with Ms. Hollis. In July, I don't know who we discussed it

4 with.

5 If this is a question that will be on our agenda every day, I

6 should like to kindly request you that I -- you do not ask me to say

7 anything. I said something once and for all, and I think that's enough.

8 Thank you.

9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I have a question to the

10 parties. I don't know if my colleagues have questions as well, but I

11 would like to raise an issue at this point.

12 I think, that is to say, I see that here we have a very

13 exceptional element. I don't think you were thinking along the lines of a

14 prejudgement and false testimony.

15 We have a witness here who testified before the Tribunal, and he

16 was on oath, and according to the Defence, he lied. So that is a

17 different aspect, and it is an extremely important aspect which does touch

18 upon the honour of an individual, and therefore, I think that the Chamber

19 should deal with this. And that is what I see now that is different.

20 This is different compared to situations that have gone before.

21 So I would like to introduce this question for discussion to have

22 the matter clear for all of us. And I do see this difference which is a

23 difference of substance, a truly important difference of substance.

24 I am now going to give the floor to Madam Judge Wald. I'm sure

25 you have a question, Judge.

Page 6344

1 JUDGE WALD: Well, I had a comment, so I'll follow up with my

2 comment rather than a question.

3 I have some problems, frankly, with distinguishing -- it seems to

4 me that every time that one seeks to contradict or one seeks to impeach a

5 witness, there's always the underlying notion of the question being

6 whether or not the witness has told the precise story before, or is

7 telling it now, and whether, if there is contradictions, there are

8 contradictions of memory or possibly contradictions of veracity. So I

9 don't think the fact that somebody accuses somebody of telling a lie makes

10 the situation different.

11 I don't find this that different from some of the earlier

12 situations that have arisen where statements from foreign countries, et

13 cetera, were attempted to be introduced. I don't think the fact that

14 somebody simply says, "Well, maybe you told a lie," that -- I think this

15 could have been handled in the regular mechanism that we set up on July

16 4th with a direct cross-examination. So I wouldn't see that as a complete

17 difference.

18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Keegan.

19 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour, thank you. It seems to me the July

20 4th issue was also in some respects added to, to some extent, when we

21 changed from the issue of statements to transcripts, in particular; the

22 difference being many of the statements are not sworn, particularly

23 depending in various countries where they come from.

24 For example, in this case, although again that was alluded to by

25 Mr. Simic, there's nowhere in the statement does it indicate that the

Page 6345

1 witness was at any time enjoined to ensure that he was telling the truth.

2 The advisement he receives is that, as indicated in the statement, you

3 don't have to make a statement if you don't want to, period. So again, it

4 was a question of counsel using misleading information to confuse the

5 witness.

6 The question that becomes here, the Defence is trying to use a

7 document to make very clear inference the witness is lying, therefore to

8 attack their credibility. The problem is, they are then misstating the

9 document. We are then prohibited from introducing the rest of the

10 documents which would, in fact, be the only real way to rebut that

11 inference; otherwise, Judge Wald, we would really almost have to go

12 through every single question and answer covering an entire issue so that

13 the Chamber would have the ability to see the total scope of the witness's

14 answers with respect to a particular issue, and that's the difficulty

15 here. It's because the way the examinations are conducted, the witnesses

16 don't get necessarily exactly what we're saying. They're getting an

17 interpretation. And without actually having the full flavour of their

18 examination, it almost becomes impossible to select a particular question

19 and say this is a definitive answer on that topic, unless it is in the

20 most simplest terms.

21 JUDGE WALD: I guess I'm not understanding the scope of your -- at

22 one point I thought you were saying because it's a transcript and under

23 oath previously, that puts it in a special category. If you are using it

24 to impeach somebody, you should be able to put the whole transcript. But

25 then on the second point you seem to be saying, well, here it's in certain

Page 6346

1 cases in order to refute, in order to show the alleged inconsistency in

2 context, you would have to read so much into the redirect that it would

3 just be confusing. I don't know which one. All I know is what's sauce

4 for the goose ought to be sauce for the gander, and it seems to me this

5 has arisen in other situations where we didn't let it in.

6 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour. I understood that, in fact -- the

7 Prosecution understood that, in fact, transcripts in a different category,

8 per the ruling of this Chamber, from statements. The transcripts are in a

9 separate category.

10 JUDGE WALD: Where did you get that impression?

11 MR. KEEGAN: From the ruling of this with respect to the admission

12 of transcripts for witnesses. For example, if they adopt them, they are

13 allowed in. And as I understood --

14 JUDGE WALD: But we're -- well, all right. Go ahead.

15 MR. KEEGAN: As I understood the Presiding Judge's comments

16 earlier on this issue today that, in fact, transcripts can be admitted to

17 establish a contradiction. And again, that's what I heard and what I saw,

18 at least in the English language, what I saw and what I heard in the

19 transcript. I believe if we go back and look in the transcript, that's

20 the way it will read.

21 But point here is the Prosecution -- the nature of these questions

22 are fundamentally unfair to these witnesses. The nature of the

23 examination is the witness is being read from a document which they don't

24 have --

25 JUDGE WALD: Are you talking about the transcript now or the -- or

Page 6347

1 the statement made in the foreign country?

2 MR. KEEGAN: We're talking now -- I'm focusing on the transcript.

3 But because in this particular examination they were so intertwined, we

4 think that, in fairness, they all should come in. But point is the

5 witnesses normally don't have the document in front of them; second,

6 they're not asked, "Did you make this answer?" They simply said, "You

7 said this." These witnesses now are totally confused because they're

8 being told by an officer of the court, as they see it, that they said

9 this. They have no independent memory of that.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please slow down.

11 MR. KEEGAN: So we think it's a totally misleading type of

12 examination, and we think it is a fundamental issue here to address

13 exactly the nature of the examinations and how they should be construed as

14 well as conducted, and we think that if the Chamber has the opportunity to

15 review the transcript in full, then it can come to its own determination

16 on this issue.

17 JUDGE WALD: So you think transcripts are fundamentally

18 different. So that we use one mechanism for cross-examination and trying

19 to establish contradictions for every kind of statement except a

20 transcript, and in a transcript, if the other side thinks that it's been

21 taken out of context, we put the whole transcript into the record? I

22 mean, is that your position? I'm just trying to get your position.

23 MR. KEEGAN: Your Honour, I think it would obviously depend on the

24 nature of the issue. If it was really just one solitary issue, then you

25 could say, "We'll put in that one section of the transcript." But here,

Page 6348

1 for example, Mr. Simic tried to attack a number of areas. So, therefore,

2 we do think it would be the whole of the transcript of this witness'

3 testimony. I mean, obviously I think it would depend on the issue.

4 JUDGE WALD: And that's only transcripts? It's not other

5 statements under oath?

6 MR. KEEGAN: Again, it was the Prosecution's understanding that

7 transcripts did have a separate place. So we would start with that. But

8 we think, for example, that in the right circumstances, a statement could

9 be admissible, which is why the Prosecution has not objected on many

10 occasions to it when it was the Defence who wanted to put it in. I agree,

11 but that doesn't mean that those kinds of rulings can't be revisited,

12 because in this case they have gone much farther than they have in the

13 past.

14 In the past, it has normally been issue maybe, perhaps two. In

15 this case, it was a very wholesale attack and, therefore, we think that in

16 particular in light of the misstatements made by counsel during the

17 cross-examination, as we see it, that it does require review of the

18 transcript in fairness both to counsel for the Defence and for the

19 witness. We think that there should be exceptions to rules. We think the

20 rule has a very good place, but when they're trying to use that rule as a

21 sword --

22 JUDGE WALD: Every cross-examiner tries to use what they've got

23 for contradictory as a sword. I see a real slippery slope in our having

24 to distinguish each case as to whether or not we'll let the impeaching

25 material go into the basic record by looking at the motives of the

Page 6349

1 cross-examiner, which we can't discern anyway.

2 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour, but of course in many jurisdictions

3 there is, you know, a device called a rule of completeness.

4 JUDGE WALD: I know, and I would agree about that, but we tried to

5 put the rule of the completeness through in the prior ruling by having

6 people read it into the record.

7 MR. KEEGAN: But then, Your Honour, my point is in this case, for

8 example, we would have to have read half this transcript into the record,

9 and we don't think that's the most effective use of the Trial Chamber's

10 time nor the time of the parties when, by admitting the record, the Trial

11 Chamber can make its own.

12 And we also think that, quite frankly, if it was the situation

13 where these transcripts and statements were possibly going to be admitted,

14 you might see a reduced use of them -- of this kind of mechanism as a

15 sword because then the party is in peril that in fact the whole statement

16 will come in.

17 JUDGE WALD: And we also have the problem that brought up the

18 whole situation several months ago, because we have a joint trial with, as

19 Mr. Simic said, with five defendants, and the transcript may come in and

20 you may think the whole transcript is necessary to make your point for one

21 witness. It comes in there and it implicates say -- I'm not saying this

22 one, but it implicates four other witnesses.

23 MR. KEEGAN: Your Honour, in that case --

24 JUDGE WALD: Four other defendants, sorry.

25 MR. KEEGAN: Obviously, then, the parties have to be -- no rule is

Page 6350

1 perfect, obviously, Your Honour, but there are a number of ways to do

2 that. One, it can be introduced for the limited purpose only of whether

3 it is consistent or, in fact, is a contradictory statement; second, the

4 other parties would have the opportunity to cross-examine those points.

5 The fact is, for example, today, Mr. Prcac' name was mentioned in

6 response to Judge Rodrigues' question, and so counsel for Mr. Prcac could

7 have cross-examined this witness if they had chosen to do so, but they

8 didn't. So we don't see the equality of arms issue as even arising here

9 because the name did come out on the record, it's in the transcript, they

10 didn't cross-examine; that was their choice.

11 But we think that the whole tenor of this cross-examination was to

12 accuse this individual of being a liar, and it was done by misrepresenting

13 what, in fact, is actually in the transcript. And as I said, Your Honour,

14 our only choice in this kind of situation would be then to try and lay out

15 entire transcript.

16 The problem becomes, as I indicated in the first instance, this

17 witness can't automatically validate everything that's in the transcript.

18 First off, it happened a couple of years ago; second, as I said, there is

19 no actual recording of what he was asked in his own language. So we have

20 the other problem of what he was actually asked in the first instance,

21 which is why we say that it is in fact the totality or the grouping of the

22 testimony about a particular event that becomes so important.

23 JUDGE WALD: Thank you.

24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Judge Rodrigues, please.

25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think that we have received

Page 6351

1 enough information as regards this issue, but I will give the floor once

2 again to Mr. Krstan Simic to wind up the debate, because we have to

3 continue with the witnesses.

4 But before we proceed with the witness, I will quickly hear you,

5 Mr. Simic.

6 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have been caught

7 with accusations by Mr. Keegan. The witness had documents in front of

8 him. The Prosecution had documents. I really did read out only those

9 portions which indicated that the witness cannot be believed, but I read

10 them very precisely, and there was no objection from the Prosecution, and

11 I didn't consider that to be in question.

12 For illustration purposes, Mr. Keegan brought up the question of

13 caution for the witness.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We all know what happened,

15 Mr. Simic. We were here; we saw; we attended your cross-examination.

16 Now, what would you like to add that is new?

17 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I would like to say that, during

18 the cross-examination, I used the methods which were allowed in order to

19 show that the witness really did not speak the truth in many details and,

20 if I was the Prosecutor, I wouldn't have brought him here.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. Simic.

22 Well, Mr. Simic, you will now give an opportunity to the Prosecutor to say

23 exactly the same thing. Please try to restrain yourself when it comes to

24 such comments, because we are entering a very perilous area.

25 I think that we have heard enough comments as regards this issue.

Page 6352

1 We will consult amongst ourselves and we will render our ruling tomorrow

2 morning.

3 We really have to be mindful of the time that we spend with

4 witnesses. This again looks like a Status Conference, and we are supposed

5 to be hearing witnesses this afternoon.

6 Mr. Keegan, who is your next witness?

7 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour. Given that there's only eight

8 minutes left in the session, we would prefer to simply start with

9 Mr. Malik in the morning, first thing.

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, then. I don't know.

11 I was thinking of going perhaps until 5.30 because we really need to

12 finish on Friday, 2.00 in the afternoon.

13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.

14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic?

15 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I should like to take

16 advantage of these few moments to broach a subject which I consider to be,

17 from the aspects of the Defence of Mr. Kvocka, very vital.

18 You spoke about this question yourself. The Prosecution tabled a

19 request for consolidation of the indictment. The Defence of Mr. Kvocka

20 tendered an objection to that consolidation because we think that it is

21 not a consolidation but an amendment of the indictment where the time of

22 the indictment, the time frame, is being changed.

23 There is still time for other objections, but as there are only

24 two more days left, I should like to ask that this question be decided so

25 that we're not faced with a position where we have not got a definite

Page 6353

1 indictment towards the end of the proceedings.

2 So after the position taken by the Prosecution, I should like to

3 be given an opportunity to make another statement, because by Friday --

4 well, that's what I wanted to say, that this should be done by Friday.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic. The Chamber

6 issued a ruling whereby the Defence was given an opportunity to respond

7 after the receipt of the translation. I think it was seven days after the

8 receipt of translation. I don't know whether the document has been

9 translated or not. However, there is one thing that I do know, and that

10 is that certain Defence counsel have already responded, but we do not have

11 responses of all Defence counsel as yet.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What I can -- yes. That is what

14 I can confirm.

15 Madam Judge Wald has just reminded me that we still do not have

16 responses by the Defence counsel.

17 Could you tell me if you have all submitted responses to the

18 motion for consolidation of the indictment pursuant to the conditions that

19 were made, that were indicated?

20 Mr. Fila?

21 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] I completely agreed with Mr. Keegan,

22 that he did not change anything, and I didn't think that it was my

23 responsibility to make any objection or comment. Mr. Keegan joined two

24 indictments and, as far as I'm concerned, that is all right with respect

25 to me. I'm not going to make any objections.

Page 6354

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Nikolic.

2 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my position is the same

3 as my colleague Mr. Fila's; we have no reason for any opposition with

4 regard to an indictment consolidated in this way.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. But as you know, the

6 motion treated two separate issues. One issue was the consolidation of

7 the indictment or, rather, a joinder of two indictments, and the other

8 issue was the issue of corrections, which was raised by Mr. Simic. So we

9 have two things, the consolidation of the indictment and also corrections

10 of the terms used in the indictment, including certain names and dates.

11 I don't know what exactly you're referring to. You say you do not

12 oppose the motion of the Prosecutor to consolidate the indictment. In

13 general, if that is the case, we do not have any problem with that.

14 Yes, Mr. Fila. I will give you the floor again, but let us hear

15 the end of Mr. Nikolic's intervention.

16 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] We have no objections to make, no

17 opposition at all, either with regard to consolidation or putting right

18 anything. Everything is the same as in the previous indictment.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, then.

20 Mr. Fila.

21 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it is the following:

22 With respect to what has been added to the indictment, it is the result of

23 the testimony of a witness. I can assume that Mr. Keegan will have

24 another addition to make or amendment to make with respect to the

25 testimony of another witness.

Page 6355

1 I cannot prevent Mr. Keegan from writing out an indictment on the

2 basis of the evidence he has presented. The question now arises is

3 whether we should have an initial appearance or not if you increase the

4 number of counts or acts.

5 In my opinion, it does not require this, and that is why I have no

6 intention of reacting at all. Thank you, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Nikolic.

8 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] I was just told that this did not --

9 was not recorded in the Livenote. I said for the accused Kos, and I

10 wanted to make that addition. It was for the accused Kos. That was not

11 recorded a moment ago.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] It's already on the record,

13 thank you very much.

14 Mr. Stojanovic, I think that now we have the responses. We know

15 the responses of Mr. Nikolic and Mr. Fila; that is to say, they do not

16 have any position to the motion submitted by the Prosecutor according to

17 the conditions that were set out.

18 Mr. Stojanovic.

19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you. We shall

20 be giving a definite response tomorrow, a definite answer -- I don't think

21 that is too late -- because we have to check some things out. So you will

22 be having a definite answer from us tomorrow.

23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good, thank you.

24 Mr. Jovan Simic.

25 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have no opposition,

Page 6356

1 no objection to make as the first indictment is identical to the second

2 one. We reserve the right to remain the last, as we agreed at the

3 beginning.

4 As far as the dates and events are concerned and the corrections

5 to be made, this will be solved, as we said, during the Status Conferences

6 in the course of the proceedings.

7 And briefly, we have no objections, no oppositions to make.

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] If I understand you correctly,

9 there are no -- the Defence of Kos, Radic, Prcac do not oppose the motion

10 for consolidation of the indictment, but the Defence counsel of the

11 accused Kvocka does oppose the motion, and tomorrow we will hear the

12 response of Mr. Stojanovic, who's representing the accused Zigic.

13 Mr. Simic, we already considered the possibility of issuing a

14 written decision. If we do not manage to do so on time, we will do it

15 after the 6th of October. That is to say, after the 6th of October, you

16 will receive the decision in writing.

17 Now I'm going to give the floor to Mr. Keegan concerning the

18 motion to consolidate the indictment. Am I correct in seeing two aspects

19 to the motion, one being the motion for consolidation of the indictment,

20 and the other motion to correct certain mistakes? As regards the

21 consolidation of the indictment, for us it's one in the same indictment,

22 and there's no need for any initial appearances.

23 MR. KEEGAN: Correct, Your Honour. That's the Prosecution's

24 position also. And yes, there are two aspects to the motion. One is the

25 consolidation of the two previous indictments into one single indictment.

Page 6357

1 The second issue was the motion for correction of the schedules which were

2 appended to both original indictments for the purposes of correcting some

3 errors in the dates in some of the blocks, but not all, and also the

4 spelling of a couple of names within the schedules.

5 So there are two separate aspects to it, and we, of course, as I'm

6 sure the Trial Chamber is aware, would join with Mr. Simic in indicating

7 that obviously this does need to get resolved as soon as possible. And so

8 it may be perhaps that once we have the answer from Mr. Stojanovic, we can

9 set a schedule for response by the Prosecution and a decision, whether

10 that's through oral hearing or in writing.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. I don't think we should

12 continue in discussing the merits of the issue. We have no more time left

13 this afternoon.

14 Tomorrow we will hear the final response of the counsel for the

15 accused Zigic, and thereafter we will give an opportunity to the

16 Prosecutor to reply, and afterwards we will render our decision. The

17 decision will be rendered in writing, and you will receive a copy of it.

18 So I don't think that we should have a motion hearing for that --

19 or perhaps I should ask you that question. Do you really think that it

20 would be necessary to have a motion hearing to discuss the issue orally,

21 or do you think that it is sufficient for us to consider the arguments

22 that have been heard so far and issue a decision in writing?

23 Mr. Simic, could you perhaps speak on behalf of all of the

24 accused.

25 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] The others have no objection to

Page 6358

1 make, so there's no need. But I have another proposal, or rather, a

2 request to make. Mr. Stojanovic will be stating his views tomorrow with

3 regard to his position.

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Mr. Simic, I'm sorry

5 to interrupt you. You do not have any objection to what? To having a

6 written decision without a motion hearing, or what?

7 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] The other teams. No, what I wanted

8 to say was the following, Your Honour: Mr. Stojanovic will be telling

9 you --

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You do not oppose the motion, is

11 that the case?

12 There seems to be a problem here, sorry. Could you please start

13 again.

14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I have an objection to make, and I

15 expect an answer from the Prosecution, but to speed matters up --

16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, I'm sorry to

17 interrupt you, but I asked you a very specific question. My question was,

18 do you need a motion hearing to orally discuss the motion that was filed

19 by the Prosecutor?

20 You said that the other Defence counsel do not oppose. Do not

21 oppose what? I wanted to know whether the Defence needs a motion hearing,

22 a separate motion hearing to discuss orally the motion that was filed by

23 the Prosecutor. Do you understand me?

24 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I do. I just wanted to say that

25 I'm not speaking on behalf of all the Defence teams because they said that

Page 6359

1 this wasn't a problem that they were concerned with. It is me that is in

2 the problem, and that is where the misunderstanding arose, and I wanted to

3 speed matters up.

4 If Mr. Stojanovic tomorrow presents his position, and if the Trial

5 Chamber enables me to present one more point of view with respect to the

6 transcript, I would not ask for a hearing. Three minutes would be enough

7 from the aspects of the Kvocka Defence to bring in a decision.

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So you will need three minutes

9 to discuss the motion orally?

10 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Three minutes.

12 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Three minutes.

13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] It's on the transcript. Very

14 well then, thank you.

15 So we will have a three-minute debate. The Prosecutor will be

16 here. I'm not going to ask him if he's going to need any additional time,

17 but maybe we will need five minutes altogether.

18 So this brings us to the end of our hearing today. Tomorrow,

19 9.30. See you tomorrow, and have a pleasant evening all of you.

20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.07 p.m., to

21 be reconvened on Thursday, the 5th day of October,

22 2000, at 9.30 a.m.