1. 1 Tuesday, July 7th, 1998

    2 --- Upon commencing at 9.36 a.m.

    3 (Open session).

    4 JUDGE MAY: Yes, let the Registrar call the

    5 case.

    6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours,

    7 Case No. IT-97-24, the Prosecutor versus Milan

    8 Kovacevic.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Yes. We shall dispense with the

    10 appearances during this case. We shall assume that

    11 lead counsel will be here for the case. There may, of

    12 course, be reasons why they can't be. If that's so,

    13 then, of course, the Chamber should be told at the

    14 beginning of the hearing, but otherwise we won't have

    15 the appearances every day.

    16 Yes.

    17 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour.


    19 Examination by Ms. Hollis:

    20 Q. Dr. Greve, I would remind you that you are

    21 still under oath.

    22 A. Yes.

    23 Q. At the conclusion of yesterday's court

    24 session, we were discussing evacuations from Trnopolje

    25 by the ICRC. This morning, I would like to provide you

  2. 1 with a document we would asked to be marked as

    2 Prosecution Exhibit 37 for identification.

    3 I would note, Your Honours, that this is

    4 information which is contained in the report. It is

    5 provided as an exhibit simply for ease of discussion

    6 with the witness.

    7 Dr. Greve, can you tell us what this document

    8 is?

    9 A. This is one article taken from an agreement

    10 on the release and transfer of prisoners. It's dated

    11 1st of October, 1992. It was an agreement which was

    12 initiated or the initiative for the agreement was taken

    13 by the International Committee of the Red Cross. And

    14 it is signed by all the parties to the conflict in

    15 Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    16 Q. And that article, what does it refer to?

    17 A. It addresses the validity of documents. And

    18 it is declaring that any document, it's paragraph 1 of

    19 the article, any document, including a document

    20 renouncing or transferring property rights, assets or

    21 claims, signed by a prisoner who is to be released or

    22 transferred, has no legal validity and does not in any

    23 way affect that prisoner's rights or obligations.

    24 And in paragraph 2, it is stated that also

    25 such documents as signed by civilians to be transferred

  3. 1 to an area other than their area of former residence

    2 will have no such validity.

    3 Q. And, if you know, what was the reason that it

    4 was felt necessary to include this article in the

    5 agreement?

    6 A. It is included because the ICRC, the

    7 International Committee of the Red Cross, experienced

    8 that almost everyone who left an area and was assisted

    9 out of an area by the International Committee of the

    10 Red Cross had to sign such documents, as a matter of

    11 being allowed to leave the area by the de facto

    12 Serb authorities in Prijedor.

    13 Q. I would offer that as Prosecution Exhibit 37.

    14 I would ask at this time that the witness be

    15 shown what we asked be marked as Prosecution Exhibit

    16 38A.

    17 Dr. Greve, could you tell us what that

    18 document is?

    19 A. This is also a paragraph that's taken from my

    20 report. It is giving the population change as by

    21 nationality. That is the way people had declared

    22 themselves in opstina Prijedor between 1991, which was

    23 the time of the official census and in 1993, population

    24 count by the then Serb authorities in opstina

    25 Prijedor.

  4. 1 So, in 1991, the figures are just taken from

    2 the census, the census which I used at the time of my

    3 report, which has slightly different figures as had the

    4 census which Your Honours were provided with yesterday,

    5 which was originated from Bosnia and Herzegovina. And

    6 it has for 1993, the figures as given by the then Serb

    7 authorities. And it's my subtraction, addition,

    8 looking at the numbers, coming up with what this means

    9 in terms of reduction and new arrivals.

    10 Q. I would offer that as Prosecution Exhibit

    11 38A.

    12 And I would ask that the witness be provided

    13 with what we would ask be marked as Prosecution Exhibit

    14 38B. And as that document is being provided, I would

    15 ask you on the 1993 figures that you have, where did

    16 you get that information?

    17 A. That is information which was published by

    18 the newspaper, Kozarski Vjesnik, in an article dated

    19 2nd July 1993 and entitled, "Unofficial Census

    20 Results: Who Are We and How Many?"

    21 Q. And, Dr. Greve, the exhibit that you have

    22 just been handed, is this the article of which you just

    23 spoke?

    24 A. Yes, it is.

    25 Q. And looking at that article, if you look at

  5. 1 the third line down, could you tell us from what source

    2 the information, the numbers, were received?

    3 A. It's the Republika Srpska and it's the

    4 Republican Bureau of Statistics.

    5 Q. And then the next line indicates?

    6 A. The municipal census commission.

    7 Q. And if you look at that article, could you

    8 highlight for us the number that is given as the total

    9 number of inhabitants living in the municipality as of

    10 this census?

    11 A. It's listed as 65,551 inhabitants.

    12 Q. And the next line down, could you tell us,

    13 what is the number given for Muslims?

    14 A. The number of Muslims is stated as 6,124.

    15 Q. And the number of Catholics?

    16 A. Is 3,169.

    17 Q. And, in general terms, if you know, could you

    18 tell us what ethnic group the Catholic religion was

    19 associated with in Prijedor opstina?

    20 A. It was associated with the Croat population.

    21 And, in comparison, it's listed Orthodox figures as

    22 well and that's associated with the Serbs.

    23 Q. And what does it give as the percentage of

    24 the Prijedor population, that is of Serbian

    25 citizenship, as at the time of this census?

  6. 1 A. It's 96.3 per cent.

    2 Q. I would offer Prosecution Exhibit 38B into

    3 evidence.

    4 And I would ask that the witness be provided

    5 what we would ask be marked as Prosecution Exhibit 39

    6 for identification.

    7 Dr. Greve, can you tell us what that is,

    8 please?

    9 A. This is a press release made by the

    10 International Committee of the Red Cross. It is dated

    11 3rd October 1992 and headlined, "Saving Lives in

    12 Bosnia-Herzegovina."

    13 Q. Who is making the statement?

    14 A. It's the president of the International

    15 Committee of the Red Cross. It's Sommaruga.

    16 Q. If you could please look at page 2 of that

    17 document. The third paragraph, what is indicated in

    18 that document about observance of the principles of

    19 international humanitarian law?

    20 A. It's stated explicitly in the third line,

    21 starting almost at the end of the line, the most basic

    22 principles of international humanitarian law continue

    23 to be ignored in the field.

    24 Q. And if you will look at the next paragraph

    25 down, beginning with "moreover," what is stated in that

  7. 1 paragraph about what is termed "ethnic cleansing"?

    2 A. It is given a description of what is termed

    3 "ethnic cleansing." And it's stated that under

    4 cover -- I am in the first line of that paragraph.

    5 "Under cover of a policy of ethnic cleansing in" --

    6 quotation marks, "tens of thousands of members of

    7 minority groups in areas controlled by the parties are

    8 still at the mercy of repressive measures applied

    9 locally in accordance with a discriminatory ideology.

    10 Q. And if you will please turn to the last page

    11 of that document, the third paragraph, what is said

    12 there that the ICRC was required to do?

    13 A. ICRC sees itself as having a moral duty to

    14 save people lives, civilian lives, even if that implies

    15 that they will transfer them temporarily out of their

    16 own areas. This was a time, if I may add, that ICRC

    17 faced international criticism for participating in

    18 evacuating people.

    19 Q. Dr. Greve, the document that you have before

    20 you and the statements therein, is that consistent with

    21 your analysis and your conclusions concerning the

    22 Prijedor area?

    23 A. Yes, it is.

    24 Q. We would offer this document as Prosecution

    25 Exhibit 39.

  8. 1 MS. HOLLIS: We have no further questions,

    2 Your Honour.

    3 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Vucicevic.

    4 Cross-examined by Mr. Vucicevic:

    5 Q. Good morning, Dr. Greve.

    6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

    7 Microphone for the counsel.

    8 JUDGE MAY: Microphone.


    10 Q. Defence thanks you for coming to bring the

    11 light and add your opinion in these proceedings. At

    12 the beginning of your testimony, you, in an exhibit

    13 marked -- I mean the Prosecution Exhibit No. 8 has been

    14 introduced and that is your curriculum vitae. Could

    15 you explain to us, what are the particular assignments

    16 that you have in the international area that made you

    17 an expert to evaluate the Bosnia situation? Just

    18 briefly in summary.

    19 A. My background and expertise relates to human

    20 rights violations and possible human rights violations

    21 and investigations of human rights violations. And

    22 that goes back to work I have done. It's listed that

    23 from 1979 to '81, I worked as an assistant protection

    24 officer for the United Nations High Commission for

    25 Refugees. I was assigned having a duty station in

  9. 1 Bangkok. I was working initially with Burmese,

    2 Vietnamese refugees. It was a refugee population of

    3 about a million. I was later, when more people come to

    4 the area, assigned to work particularly with the

    5 Cambodian situation. I worked for that for about two

    6 years.

    7 Q. If I may, was that your continuous assignment

    8 or at the same time you were working also on some other

    9 responsibilities in your native country?

    10 A. No, this was a continuous assignment. And,

    11 if I dare say so, it was an emergency, so we worked

    12 almost day and night for two years. And having

    13 finished that, I thought I should write some of the

    14 basic things I had seen. I thought I could write it up

    15 quickly and easily. It turned out to be my doctoral

    16 thesis as I did further investigations into this. And

    17 I worked. But then I had other assignments as well.

    18 And I stayed in Norway and I worked for six years on

    19 what became my doctoral thesis, which relates to one

    20 modern refugee situation as compared to the

    21 International Convention on Refugees.

    22 I have worked briefly, that is, in Ethiopia

    23 during the famine. It was in 1985. I was asked to

    24 look particularly at the situation for children on

    25 their own. I worked for Save the Children. I tried to

  10. 1 assess the situation. I did so with the assistance of

    2 a local Ethiopian, who was working for Save the

    3 Children in Ethiopia. And we were asked to come up

    4 with recommendations on that basis.

    5 Q. If I may ask, how long was your assignment in

    6 Ethiopia?

    7 A. This was a brief assignment. I think the

    8 exact dates are listed in my curriculum vitae. If I

    9 may, I could, perhaps, have it in hand and it will give

    10 you the precise dates.

    11 JUDGE MAY: Exhibit 8.

    12 THE WITNESS: The exact dates are listed on

    13 page 3. It's 20th of August to 4th of September. It's

    14 a fortnight. And that was my fact finding parts. And

    15 then I worked for a few months on paperwork. I did

    16 some paperwork prior to going to Ethiopia and I

    17 continued when coming back again. And it did result in

    18 some policy changes and some recommendations for how

    19 Save the Children would go about their work for

    20 children on their own in that situation.

    21 I did work later on a fact finding mission,

    22 which was also short. It was to Angola. It was

    23 looking at refugee camps for people from Namibia under

    24 the leadership of SWAPO, Southwest African Peoples

    25 Organisation, which was, at the time, accused of having

  11. 1 possibly violated basic human rights against their own

    2 people. I did think that it was too short a visit to

    3 go to Ethiopia for the time I was assigned. Excuse me,

    4 Angola. It was only from the 30th of November to the

    5 6th of December, 1987. So I said I am pleased to go to

    6 Angola, but my work will be essentially reviewing the

    7 legal platform, their constitution, and main documents,

    8 their criminal procedure, to see if it fits with

    9 general legal standards. And I did so and they made

    10 some changes.

    11 The main change which was made was that

    12 criminal law was divided in two different laws. One

    13 was stating what was forbidden, prohibited, and the

    14 other listed the different kinds of punishment. But

    15 there were no linkage between them, that depended on

    16 the political connoisseur and the Court at every one

    17 turn. It was later changed and they had a maximum or

    18 even sometimes minimum penalty for different offences.


    20 Q. Do you have any other international

    21 assignments that you have to observe violation of the

    22 international humanitarian laws?

    23 A. Yes.

    24 Q. Besides, what I want to ask, that you went

    25 into the field and you observed it on the ground? You

  12. 1 have mentioned in the China, Ethiopia and Angola.

    2 A. I also worked as -- I am just looking to find

    3 it. I was so-called mediator with the United Nations

    4 Transitional Authority in Cambodia. On my suggestion,

    5 the U.N. appointed an ombudsman office in their work

    6 for the returnees to Cambodia. And there was some kind

    7 of an ombudsman's office that would end the civilian

    8 authority of UNTAC, United Nation Transitional

    9 Authorities in Cambodia. And I worked for them for

    10 half a year. It came within my responsibilities that

    11 all complaints against the authorities, for different

    12 authorities at the time in Cambodia, came to our

    13 office. So we looked at all kind of allegations of

    14 crimes and abuses and human rights violations. That

    15 was a continuous half year assignment and the U.N.

    16 changed, in part, on my recommendation, the wording,

    17 the Secretary-General, from, "no problem" to

    18 "atrocities."

    19 Q. Dr. Greve, looking at your CV, what you're

    20 referring to on page 5 of your assignment, of your CV,

    21 is that the first paragraph that you just talked about;

    22 is that the one?

    23 A. No, excuse me. I should have pointed out.

    24 It's on page 4 and it's listed 4th of August, 1992 to

    25 3rd of February 1993. Each and every job I've had,

  13. 1 it's listed the exact date for that specific

    2 assignment. There may have been paperwork that has

    3 continued beyond that. As I made my doctorial thesis,

    4 I was making the first prison profile for prisoners

    5 inside the People's Republic of Cambodia, and that was

    6 distributed. It was based on interviews with

    7 refugees. It was distributed to the High Commission for

    8 Refugees and to Amnesty International. I have done

    9 some human rights work for Amnesty International.

    10 Q. And that was listed in the original paragraph

    11 of your CV?

    12 A. This prison profile is not listed because

    13 that was something I did on my own initiative. I was

    14 not employed to do that.

    15 Q. I'm just trying, quickly, to add the time

    16 that you have spent on your international assignments

    17 over your professional career, and it seems that it's

    18 all together about three to three and a half years?

    19 A. Yes, or even a little less than three years

    20 in the field on assignment, yes.

    21 Q. Besides being a professional lawyer at the

    22 beginning of your career, you were a judge at different

    23 levels in the court system of your native land, Norway;

    24 correct?

    25 A. That is correct.

  14. 1 Q. Isn't it fair to assume that you have carried

    2 your international law assignments in work aside and

    3 apart from your professional duties as a judge?

    4 A. I would say that my career, or maybe it's not

    5 career, but my professional life has been three-fold.

    6 It has been as a judge; it has been as a professor of

    7 law; and it has been in international human rights

    8 issues.

    9 Q. Where were you appointed or elected? I have

    10 yet to learn what is the system of selecting judges in

    11 your native land for the first time.

    12 A. For the first time in my country, we don't

    13 have a separate career for judges. It depends on your

    14 marks, when you pass your exam. It depends on your

    15 previous practice, and you apply for a post. And it's

    16 actually our Ministry of Justice that will appoint us.

    17 We have also a special system in Norway. We become

    18 assistant district court judges as the first

    19 assignment, as a judge normally, and that will be for a

    20 time limited to two years. So you could not be a judge

    21 for more than two years at that level. So then there

    22 was several years when I was inactive, and I have been

    23 back in for ten years as a judge, but I've had a leave

    24 of absence when I've been on the U.N. missions.

    25 Q. The question that I would like to propose is,

  15. 1 while you were a judge at the Court of Appeal for the

    2 Western District of Norway, is it fair to say that it's

    3 a full-time job?

    4 A. It's fair to say it's a full-time job.

    5 Q. And you were deciding on the cases, general

    6 cases of law?

    7 A. That is correct.

    8 Q. Civil, criminal?

    9 A. That is correct.

    10 Q. Business and even, perhaps, violations of

    11 civil rights if those even existed in Norway. Has a

    12 case ever come up in your practice as a judge, in

    13 Norway?

    14 A. All kinds of cases, yes.

    15 Q. I'm asking, has a case like that ever come up

    16 that you can recall within the jurisprudence of Norway

    17 that was before you?

    18 A. There have been claims that, yes, we have

    19 violated the European Convention on Human Rights,

    20 absolutely.

    21 Q. Have you sat in judgment on that case?

    22 A. It may be one of the arguments used in

    23 several cases, yes, particularly when it comes to

    24 testimonies taken by the police and then to be ready in

    25 the court, et cetera.

  16. 1 Q. Isn't it fair to state that while you were

    2 working as a judge, you were not pursuing your

    3 international assignments? You were, indeed, very busy

    4 deciding the cases, the cases before you?

    5 A. That is correct, although I should add that I

    6 have been working a lot in my spare time on these

    7 issues as well, out of interest. And I thought

    8 particularly when it comes to the assignment relating

    9 to Cambodia and to the former Yugoslavia, the nature

    10 and kind has been such that I have felt obliged also to

    11 use a lot of my free time to work on it.

    12 Q. So you have used your after-hours to compile,

    13 correlate and examine all these statements; correct?

    14 A. As well, yes.

    15 Q. We have heard, I believe, in your statements

    16 yesterday, and if not I think it was a statement by the

    17 Prosecutor given to us earlier, that you have not

    18 travelled to the former Yugoslavia during the time that

    19 you studied this case and prepared your statement; is

    20 that correct?

    21 A. No, it's not stated, neither yesterday nor in

    22 my report that I have not travelled to Yugoslavia. I

    23 have been to Slovenia and I have been to Croatia. And

    24 I had hoped to come into the area in Croatia which were

    25 protected by UNPROFOR at the time; that was rejected.

  17. 1 I had hoped to come into Bosnia; that was rejected.

    2 But I have been once to Slovenia and Croatia with the

    3 hope that I would be able to proceed and come to the

    4 mentioned areas.

    5 Q. But you have not been in Bosnia within the

    6 boundaries of the former state -- as a state of the

    7 former Yugoslavia at all, have you?

    8 A. No, I have not. I should also add that I

    9 have later received some invitations to go, but not to

    10 go to the Prijedor area. And I had thought then I

    11 shouldn't go, but that has been in a private capacity.

    12 Q. Was that your decision not to go to the

    13 Prijedor area or was that a prohibition by the

    14 authorities who offered you that trip?

    15 A. I have never been offered to go to Prijedor.

    16 Conversely, it's always been denied me to go to

    17 Prijedor. I even suggested when the Office of the

    18 Prosecutor would go there at one time that I would be

    19 happy if I could go with them, but I was not entitled

    20 to go. But I have not formally applied to go to

    21 Prijedor after I finished working with the Commission

    22 of Experts.

    23 Q. But you indicated earlier, we just want to

    24 clear up that statement, you said that you were invited

    25 to go to Bosnia but you did not get permission to go to

  18. 1 Prijedor. Who invited you and was that the same person

    2 or entity who denied you access to Prijedor? Could you

    3 testify to that effect, please?

    4 A. Yes, I have been asked on a few occasions to

    5 go to conferences, particularly in Sarajevo, and I have

    6 declined to go. But I have said that if they could

    7 arrange it so that I could go to Prijedor, I should be

    8 pleased to go, and the answer has been no. But I have

    9 made no formal application after working with the

    10 Commission. When working with the Commission, I asked

    11 to be allowed to go, and I was not allowed to go, but

    12 that was on a general basis. The Commission of Experts

    13 was generally not allowed to go.

    14 Q. While doing your study on the Prijedor area,

    15 have you talked to any investigators or police

    16 authorities or diplomats who have furnished you with

    17 the reports which are the basis of your statement?

    18 A. Yes, I have talked to a few of them.

    19 Q. Could you name a few and describe the nature

    20 of your conversations?

    21 A. Since I did not -- maybe I can give a general

    22 explanation of how I went about the Prijedor study,

    23 because that will, perhaps, put it in --

    24 JUDGE MAY: Yes, deal with the question as

    25 you want.

  19. 1 A. Thank you, Your Honour. When I wanted to

    2 study Prijedor, I initially looked at the statements

    3 from Sweden. And on that occasion, I did meet the one

    4 who had organised that such statements were taken in

    5 Sweden. The legal counsel of the Secretary-General of

    6 the UN, his name is Hans Corell, and he told me how

    7 and why he had arranged for such statements to be taken

    8 in Sweden. He had actually, himself, participated with

    9 the European Council Mission to the former Yugoslavia

    10 and encountered that there were many allegations of

    11 serious violations of basic law and customs of war,

    12 human rights violations, allegations of that.

    13 So he suggested to his ministry, he was with

    14 the Swedish Foreign Ministry when coming back, that

    15 everyone who had permission to stay in Sweden, refugees

    16 for humanitarian reasons, they could stay there. If

    17 they so wanted, they could come forward and explain

    18 whatever they wanted about what they saw as having been

    19 violations of their basic rights in the former

    20 Yugoslavia.

    21 So he told me about this on the occasion when

    22 I went there and looked at the Swedish statements. So

    23 having that at the back of my head and learning --

    24 Q. If I may just jog your memory on this one.

    25 Did Mr. Hans Corell give you any statements that he had

  20. 1 collected, either personally or they were collected for

    2 his study?

    3 A. No, but he gave me a general understanding of

    4 how he had gone about organising things in Sweden. And

    5 when I wanted to understand how I could try to

    6 understand the area of Prijedor, I had to work out some

    7 kind of methodology, and there was no such studies to

    8 my knowledge ever made in this world before. So there

    9 were no -- I could not go to some books to find out how

    10 I could do that.

    11 So I decided that for two main reasons, one

    12 was security considerations for the witnesses, and one

    13 was to have as much correct information as possible, I

    14 would try to approach people who had left the former

    15 Yugoslavia, living somewhere else, preferably in very

    16 different countries, as many countries as possible, and

    17 at a distance from one another, so that no one could

    18 threaten just a handful of refugees, and by that I sort

    19 of end my study.

    20 Also because I thought with the experience I

    21 had from interviewing refugees in Southeast Asia, it

    22 would be wise that people, and forgive me for saying

    23 that, but sometimes people sit together in the evening

    24 preparing for next morning's interview, not that they

    25 want to lie. They try to figure out, "Was it like this

  21. 1 or perhaps it was slightly different," and everyone is

    2 afraid of making the mistake. They try to come forward

    3 with the true information, but I did not want that to

    4 happen. I wanted the people to give as genuine

    5 information as possible. So I wanted the statements to

    6 be taken in as many different places and preferably

    7 simultaneously as possible.

    8 For this reason, and as we heard with the

    9 Commission of Refugees, not one cent, not a penny. We

    10 did not have any money for the Prijedor study. So I

    11 went, hat in hand, to some different countries,

    12 including my own, and said "Well, we have a

    13 neighbouring country. Hans Corell has made an

    14 excellent approach to gather information. May I

    15 suggest my own country do it the same way?" And I did

    16 gather with some volunteers, judges, lawyers, military

    17 lawyers, investigating officers, and I told them, "I

    18 would like to look at and have interviewed people in

    19 Norway."

    20 I should perhaps add that since I had been a

    21 staff member with UNHCR, I did approach UNHCR, and

    22 UNHCR did inform me that a lot of people with whom UNHCR

    23 had been in contact when they had come out of Bosnia to

    24 Karlovac, and UNHCR was entitled to be in charge of

    25 them or mandated to be in charge of them, UNHCR had

  22. 1 asked to see them resettled or evacuated to third

    2 countries. So UNHCR could give me a list to which

    3 countries people had been preceded, specifically also

    4 from the area of Prijedor, people who came from

    5 Prijedor.

    6 Because as is listed in my report, on the 2nd

    7 of August, 1992, an American journalist with the name

    8 Roy Gutman wrote an article in the newspaper called --

    9 MR. VUVICEVIC: Your Honour, I would object

    10 to this part of the statement, because the Prosecution

    11 would be free to call, and I was only asking about

    12 methodology. And we have gone far beyond the scope of

    13 cross.

    14 JUDGE MAY: Well, perhaps you could go on and

    15 leave Mr. Gutman out.

    16 A. I shall leave Mr. Gutman out, Your Honour.

    17 What I wanted to say is only this: That this was the

    18 time when UNHCR and ICRC, because the press focused on

    19 Prijedor, and Prijedor was the first large area from

    20 which large scale transfers with international

    21 assistance was taking place. For that reason, UNHCR

    22 had very exact information, because they had a huge

    23 group of people coming from Prijedor at about the same

    24 time in October, November, December 1992, and they had

    25 had to make special appeals to the world community to

  23. 1 see if they could take care of these people, bringing

    2 them to other countries.

    3 For that reason, they knew to what countries,

    4 otherwise, I wouldn't expect the High Commissioner,

    5 despite all his good work or her good work, to have

    6 exact information about where people came from and be

    7 able to easily find this information. But they had it

    8 concerning the people from Prijedor, and that was what

    9 gave me the idea of continuing the good work of

    10 Mr. Hans Corell, and to follow some of the procedures

    11 that had been used in Sweden. And I did meet

    12 personally with the people doing the interviews in

    13 Norway, but I met with them to explain the methodology

    14 prior to them doing the interviews.

    15 I have also spoken with some of them

    16 afterwards, but I have not spoken with them about the

    17 interviewing process as such. They were all

    18 professionals, and I left it for them. I thought it

    19 would be wiser for me to be provided with information

    20 which I could look at and analyse than to, sort of, get

    21 mixed into the information gathering process itself.

    22 Q. Judge Greve, if I may continue, what were the

    23 other countries that you got statements from, besides

    24 Norway and Sweden? Could you just enumerate the

    25 countries, please?

  24. 1 A. Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands, Malaysia,

    2 Germany, Croatia, on my initiative directly. Having

    3 happened without my knowledge and slightly on a

    4 different format, the UK, US, France, Italy,

    5 Switzerland and Denmark. I think I've mentioned them.

    6 Q. Okay, thank you.

    7 A. Excuse me. Yes, there were a few statements

    8 that came slightly different from Portugal. But my

    9 sort of 400 statements I referred to were those

    10 gathered by me in the first six countries, and then the

    11 other interviews came on top of that.

    12 Q. So is it fair to conclude that you relied, in

    13 your report, only on 400 statements from the six

    14 countries, and I will read them for the record, Sweden,

    15 Norway, The Netherlands, Malaysia, Germany and Croatia,

    16 and you have disregarded the other statements from the

    17 other countries?

    18 A. That is not correct. I used it as my basic

    19 information, but I was asked to analyse the information

    20 I could gather and not to limit it to one or a few

    21 sources. I sought for every possible source. I

    22 approached every journalist whom I knew had been to the

    23 area. I approached every agency whom I knew had been

    24 to the area prior to or after what had happened. I

    25 even met with -- of course, as I read to you, I also

  25. 1 met with Serb diplomats in Geneva. I tried to meet

    2 with everyone.

    3 Q. If I may ask you? You said Serb

    4 diplomats, because at that time, there were two

    5 separate entities, one is the Republika Srpska, and the

    6 other is the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia, and the

    7 Republic of Yugoslavia, as it may be. Who were those

    8 diplomats? Because there were diplomats at that time

    9 circulating in Europe from the Republika Srpska?

    10 A. When I referred to the diplomats, I may like

    11 to add that Article 3 of the Constitution of the

    12 Republika Srpska, or the Republic of the Serb People

    13 in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was changed to

    14 the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the

    15 name again changed to Republika Srpska, Article 3 of

    16 the Constitution states that this entity is a part of

    17 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. So it's not a

    18 separate state. It's in its constitution that the --

    19 MR. VUVICEVIC: I object to this testimony

    20 because the witness is testifying to the ultimate

    21 question on this.

    22 JUDGE MAY: Well, I think we will accept it

    23 for the moment. We'll bear in mind what you say. If

    24 you can go on, Judge Greve.

    25 A. So I understood that because, as I mentioned

  26. 1 yesterday, the only document we ever got from Serbian

    2 authorities in the wide sense, including all of them,

    3 was that particular constitution. As it was listed in

    4 the constitution, as provided to us, that they belong

    5 to the state, according to Article 3, we approached,

    6 yes, the federal authorities in Geneva. And I dare say

    7 also I tried to get hold of -- I read, of course, the

    8 Nordic languages, English, French, German. I tried to

    9 get hold of every source I could possibly find,

    10 including also newspaper articles. Kozarski Vjesnik,

    11 when we came across that, I tried to get as many of

    12 them as possible and to have them translated, so any

    13 source I could possibly think of.

    14 I met with ICRC. For reasons of

    15 confidentiality, they could not share with me; UNHCR

    16 could not share with me information. But what people

    17 could do would be on a private basis to tell me if I

    18 was on a blind road.

    19 MR. VUVICEVIC: With Your Honours permission,

    20 because we have heard this testimony about the

    21 constitution of the Republika Srpska, I would like to

    22 address a question or two to tidy up that matter.

    23 Q. Dr. Greve, are you aware that Bosnia and

    24 Herzegovina were recognised as an independent state in

    25 April of 1992?

  27. 1 A. Yes, I have been advised of that, yes.

    2 Q. Are you aware that Bosnia and Herzegovina had

    3 a constitution of their own as an independent state?

    4 A. Yes, I think I am aware of that. I've not

    5 read that constitution, but I assume that is correct.

    6 Q. But you have read the constitution of the

    7 Republika Srpska; haven't you?

    8 A. Yes, I have. The draft was provided for us.

    9 The final was only in August of the same year, I had

    10 read that later, but we were provided a draft which is

    11 dated back in -- I think we received -- it's one of the

    12 exhibits, and if I recollect it rightly, it's the one

    13 that was made in February.

    14 Q. The constitution is supreme law of the land,

    15 supreme law of an independent land; isn't that correct?

    16 A. That is correct.

    17 Q. Based on your statement, it logically follows

    18 that Republika Srpska is an independent country; isn't

    19 it?

    20 A. I shall not try to judge on legal issues.

    21 That --

    22 JUDGE MAY: I think that is a matter for us.

    23 MR. VUVICEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

    24 Q. Therefore, when you talked to diplomats from

    25 the representing government in Belgrade, you were not

  28. 1 sure whether they lawfully represented the Republika

    2 Srpska or not. It just follows from your previous

    3 statement; is that correct?

    4 A. I did not approach them to ask them to have

    5 official information in the sense that it was important

    6 to know whether they were representing the legal

    7 authorities also for the Bosnian Serbs or not. I did

    8 approach them as a matter of courtesy, as we did not

    9 receive information, but I presented them with the

    10 progress of my study. I did not disclose my sources,

    11 because myself, even I don't know the name of my

    12 witnesses. But I explained to them the way I had

    13 approached the issue. I explained to them my

    14 conclusions, my findings, my assessments.

    15 Q. At this level, Dr. Greve, we haven't gotten

    16 into your methodology yet. I just want to ascertain

    17 who denied you access to Bosnia, even though you

    18 received the constitution of the Republika Srpska.

    19 I'll give you an open question, but please if you can

    20 give me a brief answer.

    21 A. I think this is, Your Honours, in evidence

    22 already, because I think the constitution -- is not the

    23 constitution -- well, I don't know if it can be

    24 included, but we, meaning the Commission of Experts,

    25 were given that draft constitution. And there is a

  29. 1 letter with it saying that "Although we provided you

    2 with this," it's addressed to our senior legal

    3 secretary, we had three legal secretaries, Mr. Kotliar

    4 who was a Russian, it states that "Although we provided

    5 you with this, it does not mean that we want to

    6 cooperate with you or that this can be taken as or seen

    7 as cooperation." It was the general approach that they

    8 would not want to cooperate with us in terms of letting

    9 us have documents or having access. And it was

    10 Mr. Kotliar of the Commission of Experts who tried to

    11 facilitate, who wrote the official letters to seek

    12 cooperation.

    13 Q. I will probe a little deeper on this point.

    14 You indicated that you did not receive permission to

    15 travel to Bosnia by the federal Yugoslav diplomats in

    16 Switzerland. At that time, did they represent that

    17 that was the official position of the government of

    18 Republika Srpska or that was their own position?

    19 A. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I should

    20 emphasise that when I spoke with diplomats myself, I

    21 did not raise the issue of going to Prijedor. That was

    22 raised by the Commission as such, both with authorities

    23 from Republika Srpska and Belgrade, but that was raised

    24 on a formal basis by the Commission. Not by me

    25 personally, but by our legal secretary, and not in my

  30. 1 meeting.

    2 Q. Dr. Greve, you testified that you replaced a

    3 member of the Commission who passed away. Were those

    4 requests of the Commission made before or after your

    5 appointment as a member of the Commission?

    6 A. Both before and after. It's my

    7 understanding, it was made several times prior to me

    8 coming, and it was definitely raised on several

    9 occasions later.

    10 Q. When those questions were raised later, while

    11 you were officially a member of the Commission, have

    12 you seen any documents from either the government of

    13 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the Republika

    14 Srpska denying access to the commission?

    15 A. No, I don't think I've seen the documents,

    16 save for the one I previously referred to sending us

    17 the constitution.

    18 Q. Have you received any oral statements from

    19 any of the officers of the Commission or the United

    20 Nations to the effect that either the government of the

    21 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the Republika Srpska

    22 have denied this? And if you did, who told you that

    23 and when and what was the substance of that

    24 conversation?

    25 A. This was an issue which was raised on several

  31. 1 occasions or almost every meeting. The Commission of

    2 Experts would meet every two weeks. And it was raised

    3 on several occasions because every one of us had

    4 different projects, different missions, different

    5 undertakings. And we needed or we wanted to have and

    6 would have appreciated to have general access and to

    7 have documents in general.

    8 So this was raised by the chairman, and it

    9 was raised by our senior secretary, legal secretary,

    10 who was the one who took care of paperwork in this

    11 sense.

    12 Q. Did you insist to gain access to Republika

    13 Srpska or Prijedor at that time because that was your

    14 area of study?

    15 A. Maybe my way of expressing myself is not

    16 insisting, but I did ask and state that I would find it

    17 most useful, yes.

    18 Q. Why would you -- why would you have found it

    19 most useful at that time, could you explain us your

    20 reasons?

    21 A. Maybe I think it's always important if you

    22 want to get as good a picture as possible to see the

    23 area which is spoken about. I find it easier, as a

    24 person, to relate to something I have seen than to

    25 something I read about. It takes more effort when I

  32. 1 only read about it. It's possible, but it would have

    2 been even better if I also could have seen the area of

    3 Prijedor.

    4 Q. Would it be fair to say that your concern was

    5 that in order to get a representative sample, you might

    6 want to see all the units, all the sample that you're

    7 trying to picture in your report, meaning reports from

    8 one group from the second group and from the third

    9 ethnic group, in and out of Prijedor; would that be

    10 fair to state?

    11 A. I would phrase it slightly differently. I

    12 think it would have been most useful, yes. I think

    13 that we had one very important source as of the views

    14 of the Serbs in the area and that was the official

    15 newspaper, which was controlled by the new authorities

    16 in Prijedor. So Kozarski Vjesnik, I read it very, very

    17 carefully, all the numbers I could come cross. I tried

    18 to have, but that was limited, but there were some

    19 reports and information as to the news on radio

    20 Prijedor. There was some television shows from radio

    21 Telivitsi and Banja Luka. But, otherwise, I thought it

    22 was possible to get a good understanding of the events

    23 in Prijedor without going inside, but it would have

    24 been very interesting. It would have facilitated my

    25 work and I would very much have appreciated to meet

  33. 1 with the people locally, see the area, yes.

    2 Q. So you would agree with me that even though

    3 being so remote, that certain parts of the articles

    4 printed in newspaper at that time was reliable, while

    5 the other parts printed, it might be a free speech or

    6 simply editorialising. In order to be more specific,

    7 when we have an article where the newspaper reporter is

    8 directly quoting an official, you would agree with me

    9 at that time, that statement would be reliable?

    10 A. I wouldn't make such general conclusions, but

    11 I would find it most interesting if all available

    12 sources speak to the same. And what was most

    13 surprising to me, perhaps, about the 400 statements

    14 from witnesses, which were collected under my guidance,

    15 so to speak, was that it seemed as if the people, save

    16 for details, would speak with one voice. And that was

    17 so surprising that I thought I should look for all

    18 other sources to see how could it be?

    19 Q. Judge, at this time, I would like the Court

    20 to admonish the witness, even though we are all learned

    21 lawyers, but it might be, perhaps, with a depth of

    22 study and the impressions that she has had, she's

    23 sometimes not answering the question as its put. She

    24 might be answering, perhaps second or third question

    25 that I might be asking. And if this particular

  34. 1 statement, I would simply asking her to agree or

    2 disagree and then we're going back into her study. I

    3 don't want Your Honour to -- I just feel a little bit

    4 that, you know, I would like to have a latitude on

    5 cross to ask some questions that are going to probe.

    6 JUDGE MAY: I am certainly not going to

    7 admonish this witness. Perhaps, we could stick a

    8 little more closely to the question.

    9 THE WITNESS: I appreciate that, Your Honour.

    10 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour. And

    11 my apologies, Judge.

    12 Q. You have testified yesterday when you have

    13 made statements on the exhibits that were introduced.

    14 And you have quoted a statement of a certain officials,

    15 and we'll go over those statements later. At least to

    16 those statements that you read into the record

    17 yesterday and they were statements of the officials of

    18 the various entities existing in the Republika Srpska

    19 at that time. Do you feel they were reliable?

    20 A. Yes, I do feel that numerous of the quotes,

    21 numerous of the articles represented a view which was,

    22 which supported my findings, surprisingly so.

    23 Q. So you're testifying today, even though you

    24 said you relied on Kozarski Vjesnik as one of the three

    25 sources of information that you had, one being a radio,

  35. 1 Kozarski Vjesnik and I believe two sources that you

    2 said. On one hand, and on other hand, you say that you

    3 only used them to support your conclusions that you did

    4 earlier. If you can reconcile it, please, because, you

    5 know, the one thought that's coming to me, the chicken

    6 or the egg? Have you used it in your studies or you

    7 only reviewed them later on only after you made

    8 conclusions on those 400 statements or 600 statements,

    9 or whatever they were there? Place them, please,

    10 within the context of your studies.

    11 A. Actually some of the newspaper articles were

    12 available to me prior to some of the statements. So --

    13 Q. So did you doubt in the voracity of the

    14 statements of all the statements at that time or you

    15 thought that some of the statements were more true than

    16 the others?

    17 A. No, that was not my impression. I see that

    18 some of the statements are short ones, as compared to

    19 some that are very extensive. And I think they also

    20 reflect the fact that people may experience different

    21 aspects of an overall situation. So, obviously what

    22 people are expressing in the statements, will be -- I

    23 have asked that they explain about what happened prior

    24 to them leaving Prijedor and also prior to any

    25 problems, if they've encountered problems, came up.

  36. 1 But, if I may say so, I did not say that I was looking

    2 for specific statements to support what was stated in

    3 the witness statements. I was saying that I was

    4 surprised to see how witness statements were supported

    5 by a very outspoken, as I could see it, language.

    6 Q. We are going beyond the question?

    7 A. Okay.

    8 Q. Because my point of interest --

    9 MS. HOLLIS: I have an objection. I think

    10 that she's speaking directly to the question.

    11 JUDGE MAY: If you'll leave it to us to

    12 decide. Yes, what's the next question?


    14 Q. When did you get the first few copies of

    15 Kozarski Vjesnik?

    16 A. Possibly mid-February, 1992 -- 1994.

    17 Q. And that was just the beginning of your study

    18 period?

    19 A. It was actually not. Because I started

    20 working with the Commission back in October. I was

    21 approached by the Secretary-General's office, the 19th

    22 of October I was appointed by the Secretary-General on

    23 the 21st of October. And it was at that time not known

    24 whether the Commission of Experts would finish its work

    25 by the end of the year, Easter next year or next

  37. 1 summer. So it was not just at the beginning, because

    2 we had to finish actually by Easter that year. So it

    3 was around the clock work, save for when I was a

    4 judge --

    5 Q. Let me assist you a little bit with that

    6 question. When you received the first few copies of

    7 Kozarski Vjesnik, had you had on your desk at that

    8 time, any of the statements you received from the

    9 subjects from the various countries?

    10 A. Yes, I had.

    11 Q. And had you read those statements prior to

    12 receiving Kozarski Vjesnik?

    13 A. Yes, I had because the entire study --

    14 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness finish.

    15 THE WITNESS: Because the entire study

    16 started with me reading statements from Sweden.


    18 Q. So could you tell approximately how many

    19 statements? And I won't ask you any numbers, one half

    20 of it? One third? Whatever percentage might come to

    21 your mind that you have read at the time before you got

    22 the first information from the Serbian side.

    23 A. Maybe half, maybe less, I am really not able

    24 to recollect.

    25 Q. That's absolutely, you know, proper, because

  38. 1 so many years have past.

    2 A. Excuse me, it's not a matter of years that

    3 have past. It's simply that I did not pay, perhaps,

    4 that much of an attention to at what time information

    5 was floating in because I was -- I had so much

    6 information coming at the same time. And I could even

    7 have had a pile of statements at hand prior to

    8 receiving it, some newspaper articles. And I could

    9 have read them in this order or that and I did not pay

    10 attention to in which order I read them, so that I am

    11 able to state that now.

    12 Q. I realised that what I said that somehow

    13 could also mean that I was helping you testifying and

    14 it wasn't my intention at all. It was, you know, the

    15 first thing that could come in my mind.

    16 You testified before where when asked about

    17 reliability of certain information statements that you

    18 read in Kozarski Vjesnik. So, basically, you have,

    19 after having read, about half of the statements that

    20 you have received, you could then look to Kozarski

    21 Vjesnik and sift through and say, these articles are

    22 reliable and these articles are unreliable; isn't that

    23 the case?

    24 A. No, that's not the case. Because, for one,

    25 as you will see, a number of the articles from Kozarski

  39. 1 Vjesnik are subsequent to me having finalised the study

    2 as well. So --

    3 Q. Now here we are in a little bit, you know,

    4 time dispute. I am only asking to those ones that you

    5 received before you concluded your study. I am only

    6 asking the those ones where you had 50 per cent of your

    7 articles, 50 per cent of your statements before you,

    8 having read them, and then received them

    9 contemporaneously, they couldn't be after your study,

    10 there's something that you are looking, and you

    11 testified before that you used those sources. All I am

    12 asking you; how did you look at those sources, having

    13 said on various occasions yesterday that some of the

    14 articles were inconsistent with your findings or

    15 consistent with the overall study? Now the study is

    16 not finished. Now we are testifying, you only have

    17 half of statements and you have Kozarski Vjesnik. How

    18 did you look at the various quotations of the officials

    19 that were brought in that paper?

    20 A. As one of many indications of what was to be

    21 the overall situation, as one of my sources for trying

    22 to understand how things had happened in Prijedor.

    23 Q. Did you think that any of the statements made

    24 were patently false in Kozarski Vjesnik?

    25 A. I did not think that statements were false,

  40. 1 but I think that sometimes the language used was what I

    2 would not find in an ordinary newspaper article in a

    3 situation where there was no conflict.

    4 Q. So you would, in other words, find out that

    5 within the context of the armed conflict, even the

    6 newspapers do change their stories; isn't that what

    7 you're saying now?

    8 A. I am saying that the language used, such as

    9 some of the derogatives, et cetera, one would normally

    10 not find in a newspaper article.

    11 Q. But, short of having derogatory statements or

    12 ethnic slurs as we may call them, if the language is

    13 neutral on its face, then it could be accepted as

    14 true?

    15 A. It is one among several indications of what

    16 is the truth, yes. And I was open to that

    17 possibility.

    18 Q. So that the statements that you -- I'm sorry,

    19 you can finish. I'm sorry?

    20 A. I approached every source with that open

    21 mind. I want to see what can be concluded from this.

    22 I shall make no -- I shall close no doors, I shall be

    23 open-minded. I will read it and I will try to see how

    24 all of this, as I was mandated to, to try to conclude

    25 on this.

  41. 1 Q. I do thank you for the statements and I think

    2 we'll change the line of questioning. We'll leave

    3 Kozarski Vjesnik for some of the direct quotations

    4 later. You mentioned the name earlier Mr. Hans

    5 Corell. Are you familiar that he has presented a study

    6 to an international body in conjunction with another

    7 gentleman and if you could recall the other name and

    8 whether you talked to him?

    9 A. I have not talked to the other gentleman and

    10 there was a woman as well and I have read their

    11 statement later, yes.

    12 Q. If I am correct, I have read it several

    13 months ago, that study was submitted to an

    14 international body, and I believe that was to the

    15 Security Council of the United Nations before your

    16 study was admitted?

    17 A. I think it was conducted by, or commissioned

    18 by the European Council. I think, I am not able to say

    19 that exactly. I will not also be surprised if it also

    20 has been submitted to the Security Council. But it was

    21 not commissioned by the Security Council.

    22 Q. Did Mr. Corell tell you what motivated him to

    23 do that study because he was your first contact, kind

    24 of a predecessor on the job?

    25 A. He may have told me, but as far as I

  42. 1 understand, he was sort of asked to do that on behalf

    2 of the organising entity, be it the European Council

    3 or whoever. It's not something that he did on his own

    4 initiative.

    5 Q. Has he turned over to you any materials from

    6 his study?

    7 A. No.

    8 Q. Do you know whether the witnesses that you

    9 have, that came into your study were also the witnesses

    10 who were interviewed for his study, the same

    11 witnesses?

    12 A. His study and his two colleague's study, they

    13 made a joint study, was based on a mission to the

    14 former Yugoslavia. If, by chance, they have

    15 interviewed anyone who later came to be witnesses in

    16 the Prijedor study among the 400, I cannot say. I do

    17 not know. They were not in the report I have read,

    18 they are not listed by name and, in a manner which

    19 makes it possible for me -- and I am not familiar, of

    20 course, with the names, even among my witnesses -- but

    21 I have not been able to read anything in that report as

    22 if it is a reprint which I am finding among the witness

    23 statements later.

    24 Q. Use the word "report", so is it fair to

    25 conclude that you have read Mr. Corell's report?

  43. 1 A. Yes, I have. It was provided for the

    2 Commission of Experts as such.

    3 Q. Have you asked him about methodology that he

    4 had used in his study?

    5 A. I have not because his study was based on

    6 going to the former Yugoslavia on a mission. His

    7 mandate was different. He was sent on some kind of a

    8 fact finding, to my understanding.

    9 Q. Have you asked him whether he had access to

    10 the Republika of Srpska?

    11 A. I have not asked him. The questions I asked

    12 him was essentially about how he had organised things

    13 in Sweden where I was called upon to read statements.

    14 Q. You have testified before that it would have

    15 been most helpful in conducting a study to have had

    16 statements or interviews from the people in Prijedor.

    17 And yet, in starting your study, you have talked and

    18 gotten the first page, first information from the

    19 gentleman who was on the ground; haven't you?

    20 A. Yes, I have. But I don't know if Mr. Corell,

    21 to what areas they were let in, under what conditions.

    22 With this, I am not fully familiar. Something can be

    23 read straight out of the report, but I don't have the

    24 full information. I didn't see it my -- to be needed

    25 for my study to have in-depth information about that

  44. 1 particular mission.

    2 Q. You said that you haven't talked to him about

    3 his methodology. Did you presume because he was on the

    4 ground and you are on the ground in Bosnia and you are

    5 not, that those methodologies must be different and

    6 therefore you didn't ask him about it?

    7 A. I asked him about methodology in terms of how

    8 he had gone about things in Sweden, as I had been

    9 called upon to read things which he had, so to speak,

    10 created the methodology for receiving in Sweden. But I

    11 did not, at that time, I had not even yet, I think read

    12 his report. It had been provided to the Commission of

    13 Experts and I did read it at one time. But I have

    14 never spoken to him about methodology on that

    15 particular report.

    16 Q. Judge Greve, would it be fair to say that the

    17 time was so short, the funds were scarce or hardly

    18 available as you testified, that your report had to be

    19 prepared because the Security Council ordered prepared

    20 by certain time, that even a learned professional in

    21 this field, sometimes couldn't have enough time or

    22 right opportunity to ask Mr. Corell, what did you do in

    23 Bosnia?

    24 A. If I had thought it useful for my study to

    25 know the exact ways and means of that mission, I would

  45. 1 not have hesitated to give Mr. Corell a telephone call

    2 and ask him directly. I see clearly that it would have

    3 been useful to have had more time, more sources, access

    4 to Prijedor. I believe, nonetheless, that, yes, we

    5 were asked to give a report. Of that reason we gave it

    6 within the time limit we were given. But I think,

    7 nonetheless, it outlines the basics.

    8 JUDGE MAY: Are you going to move on to

    9 another topic now?

    10 MR. VUCICEVIC: Pardon me.

    11 JUDGE MAY: I am looking at the clock, it's

    12 five to eleven, we'll adjourn at eleven, so when you

    13 find a convenient moment, Mr. Vucicevic, we'll adjourn.

    14 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

    15 Q. In indicating among the six countries that

    16 you have collated the statements, you indicate

    17 Malaysia, Germany and Croatia. How did you give

    18 instructions to the officers, your assistants, even

    19 though you might have not never met them, who

    20 interviewed the former citizens of Bosnia, in those

    21 countries?

    22 A. This was done differently for different

    23 countries. That is to say, that I had, I was lucky to

    24 have my -- my predecessor had a personal assistant in

    25 the region, a gentleman called Bergsmo, Morten Bergsmo,

  46. 1 and he was assigned to work with me as my predecessor

    2 had died. And he assisted when it came to the Prijedor

    3 study. His name is listed on the front page as well

    4 that he assisted in this.

    5 I also had the advantage of my Dutch

    6 colleague, Christine Claron, who was able to be

    7 the coordinator informing the people taking interviews

    8 in this country. So I worked with my colleagues in

    9 this as well.

    10 And as for the Malaysian situation, I only

    11 spoke with the diplomatic mission in Geneva to organise

    12 it all. I did not go to Malaysia. I visited Malaysia

    13 on several occasions, but not in this context.

    14 Q. My question is, do you know what instructions

    15 were given to the investigators in the field who

    16 interviewed the subjects? How much did they know about

    17 your studies, about methodology, overall plan for your

    18 studies? Who communicate you to them and how they were

    19 controlled in a scientific way meant control, in order

    20 to give you the results for your study?

    21 A. They had specific information that I wanted

    22 to study the area of Prijedor, the Municipality of

    23 Prijedor. They had been advised that I wanted not to

    24 limit the information I sought to possible human rights

    25 violations. I wanted to know what had happened prior

  47. 1 to the Serbs taking power in Prijedor. And I wanted to

    2 know what had happened in the period before they left

    3 Prijedor. And I wanted to know under what

    4 circumstances they left Prijedor and

    5 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That is to say, those who had come

    6 first to Travnik, a number was sent to Travnik to

    7 central Bosnian areas --

    8 Q. Judge Greve, you know, we'll come to Travnik

    9 later on, you know --

    10 A. I am just saying that they were asked about

    11 the situation.

    12 JUDGE MAY: Go on, was there something else

    13 you wanted to add.

    14 THE WITNESS: I just wanted to say, I didn't

    15 ask about the general situation in Travnik, I only

    16 asked about before leaving the Serb controlled areas

    17 and how they came to leave those areas. And everyone

    18 during the interviews, knew I wanted to have that broad

    19 basis of information. And I said I want to write down

    20 what they are saying, nothing else, nothing more. And

    21 I wanted there to be many different people taking the

    22 interviews. I did not want to be one format, this

    23 question or that question. I wanted the people to

    24 speak and tell them with their own words how they

    25 perceived all this period. And that was my

  48. 1 instruction. So there were numerous people taking

    2 these interviews and my guarantee in terms of

    3 scientific control, as you worded it, would be that

    4 these were people who were used to take interviews.

    5 There would be investigation officers, immigration

    6 officials, judges, lawyers. I admit that I am sure

    7 their professional qualities may vary, but nonetheless,

    8 they were all professionals.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Yes, thank you. It's eleven.

    10 We'll adjourn, to twenty past eleven.

    11 --- Recess taken at 11.04 a.m.

    12 --- On resuming at 11.25 a.m.

    13 (The accused entered court)

    14 (The witness entered court)

    15 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Vucicevic?


    17 Q. Dr. Greve, we left off with your data

    18 collection from Malaysia, Germany and Croatia. You

    19 said that you had given instruction to the diplomatic

    20 representatives of those countries to carry your

    21 instructions to their investigators who would be

    22 interviewing the subjects; is that correct?

    23 A. That is not correct. I said as for Malaysia

    24 I spoke with the diplomatic representatives in Geneva.

    25 Q. What about Germany and Croatia?

  49. 1 A. That was not through diplomatic

    2 representatives.

    3 Q. Can you explain how you relayed your

    4 instructions to the actual investigators in those two

    5 countries?

    6 A. Yes, in the same general, broad sense as

    7 previously done and, in part, through my assistant

    8 Morton Bergsmo.

    9 Q. Being your assistant, he certainly would know

    10 how to carry out your orders. What did he do about it?

    11 A. He is a very good man in terms of carrying

    12 out instructions. I think he did a --

    13 Q. And working with such a fine person, as you

    14 are.

    15 A. I may say, perhaps, it's not your direct

    16 question, but all the statements were, of course, made

    17 available to the Security Council. And although they

    18 were never published, they were free for everyone to

    19 read within the Security Council as well. So they were

    20 made available to the Security Council, all of them.

    21 Q. Dr. Greve, being a Ph.D., I'm referring to a

    22 little bit of a bias in conducting any study. Because

    23 you referred in your testimony in Tadic's case that

    24 your methodology was imprecise. And if you could

    25 reconcile the statement made in Tadic's case and my

  50. 1 question now. How did you guard against the bias

    2 directing your instructions to Germany and Croatia?

    3 And were you at all concerned about the bias in getting

    4 the statements from the officials of those two

    5 countries?

    6 A. I did not get statements from officials. I

    7 got statements from witnesses, but they were

    8 interviewed through people who had professional

    9 backgrounds. I was concerned that, as for any

    10 statement, it could be biased, it could be everything

    11 and anything wrong with it. I was open-minded to see

    12 if there could be anything into the allegations that

    13 were made. So I wanted to compare the information, not

    14 to have it from one area, from one source. Yes, I

    15 foresaw that the Croats were, of course, involved in

    16 the conflict, so perhaps things could be biased.

    17 But what I have stated, I believe, previously

    18 also, definitely in the Tadic case, I was surprised to

    19 see that, on the average, people were speaking very

    20 much along the same lines. That was the most

    21 surprising part of this, and that was what made me

    22 think that the information I gathered could be

    23 imprecise, yes, but none the less as to basics, it was

    24 as if speaking with one voice.

    25 I must say that I'm not able to recollect

  51. 1 exactly the quotation you are making from my statement

    2 in the Tadic case. If you want my comment on that, I

    3 would appreciate it if I could possibly have it quoted

    4 to me or --

    5 JUDGE MAY: Well, obviously if a quotation is

    6 going to be used from another case, the witness should

    7 be referred to the passage. If you don't have it, you

    8 can find it, Mr. Vucicevic, maybe during the

    9 adjournment or perhaps afterwards.


    11 Q. In your report, you have indicated that in

    12 April or at the end of April of 1992, the situation in

    13 Bosanska Krajina became so dangerous that two members

    14 of the United Nations military mission in Bosnia, I

    15 believe it was UNPROFOR at that time, who were

    16 stationed in Banja Luka were removed?

    17 A. UNPROFOR has a special entity called Military

    18 Observers. And it is my understanding from visiting

    19 the UNPROFOR headquarters, all my information about

    20 UNPROFOR and the UNMO’s has been collected through that

    21 headquarters which I visited. It was then located in

    22 Zagreb.

    23 It so happened that my senior superior in

    24 Cambodia, Yasushi Akashi was the head of relations at

    25 the time, and a number of his senior staff were my own

  52. 1 friends from Cambodia. They had come straight from

    2 Cambodia to Yugoslavia. So I was greatly assisted by

    3 the Office of the Special Representative in terms of

    4 having access to UNPROFOR and to the military observers

    5 leadership.

    6 I have tried to guide the Prosecutor's office as

    7 to where the exact source could be for the date

    8 mentioned in my report. Because I came or I handed

    9 over to this Tribunal a suitcase and several boxes of

    10 documents which was handed to Deputy Prosecutor Blewitt

    11 at the time, and it was taken into the documentation

    12 information unit in the Prosecutor's office at that

    13 time. They have not been able to find the specific

    14 document. I should say I have kept no document with

    15 me, and I don't have copies of documents. So I am

    16 unable to find the exact paper where it's stated that

    17 two UNMO’s, two military observers, left Banja Luka.

    18 Q. I will supply that paragraph after the break

    19 to the Trial Chamber, but I vividly remember that in

    20 your statement, what I would like to follow up with:

    21 Have you talked to those two military officers, those

    22 military observers, that were pulled from Banja Luka on

    23 April 28th?

    24 A. Unfortunately not. They were out of the office

    25 at the time, and they could not be identified according

  53. 1 to the UNMO’s leader in Zagreb at the time, because I

    2 specifically asked and wanted to meet with them, as I

    3 had wanted to meet with anyone and everyone who had

    4 been in. I asked if there were any specific reports

    5 related to this. I was told there was not, save for

    6 the date.

    7 Q. So it seems that United Nations military

    8 mission in Yugoslavia at that time had made the

    9 evaluation that there was, indeed, so -- the conditions

    10 are so dangerous in Bosanska Krajina, and the two

    11 observers were ordered to leave the area for the

    12 reasons, obviously, of their personal safety. However,

    13 you were not being provided any documents about the

    14 decision of the appropriate United Nations office on

    15 making that particular finding, communications to the

    16 officers, nor could the officers could be located; is

    17 that correct?

    18 A. Yes and no. Part of your statement is

    19 correct.

    20 Q. Judge Greve, what I'm basically driving at,

    21 I'm driving at -- because you just said there were

    22 several suitcases and boxes of documents. To the best

    23 of your recollection, what is in those boxes so that

    24 you can help me later on ask the Trial Chamber to allow

    25 us access to those documents?

  54. 1 A. As stated, I believe the two were military

    2 observers. Military observers will normally be in an

    3 area if the U.N. thinks they can achieve something in

    4 particular with having them there. It would be ideal

    5 to have military observers out everywhere at every

    6 time. But in an armed conflict, they may have quite a

    7 low level for deciding when to withdraw staff, which

    8 has, in part, been the case in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I

    9 don't know what the reason was that made them decide to

    10 withdraw the two representatives from Banja Luka at

    11 that time.

    12 Q. Dr. Greve, the statement that you just made,

    13 the answer to my previous question is two-fold. The

    14 first is a statement on the United Nations policy on

    15 the military observers; the second one is that you did

    16 not get to receive any information about it. Where is

    17 the source of your knowledge on military policy of the

    18 United Nations in this particular case? Where did you

    19 receive this information, when you were in Cambodia,

    20 Zagreb, later on in your office, telephone

    21 conversation? How did you get to know this?

    22 A. I think I stated that my information on this

    23 is from the UNPROFOR headquarters and the special unit

    24 that has to deal with the military observers. I met

    25 both the leadership of the UNPROFOR and the leadership

  55. 1 of that specific unit in Zagreb in early 1993. And my

    2 information as to their presence in Bosnia and

    3 Herzegovina is obtained from there. I think I have the

    4 date, as I used it as a specific date in my report,

    5 that I have it in writing from that source. And I

    6 believe it to be -- it could be a situation report.

    7 It's called "SITREP" for short which is issued, I

    8 think, daily under circumstances like this. And it is

    9 giving main facts and it could be very, very brief. I

    10 mean, all that happens in one day could be, perhaps, in

    11 five lines. It could be "Military observers in Banja

    12 Luka taken out, dangerous conditions," like that.

    13 I'm not saying this was the wording. I'm

    14 saying this could possibly be the wording. I

    15 apologise. I have not been able to find that specific

    16 document, but there can be no question of the source of

    17 the information.

    18 Q. The line of questioning is just going to that

    19 very last statement you made, the source of the

    20 information. When you read this information, whatever

    21 initial document it is that you read, you explained

    22 what it could have been, it kind of jogged your

    23 interest. You saw that it was very important, and you

    24 pursued the inquiry. You have talked with civilian

    25 authorities and military authorities. Do you remember

  56. 1 the names of the officers whom you particularly

    2 inquired about these two military observers who were

    3 removed, names of either the civilian or military

    4 officers, if you know, or if you have it written

    5 someplace?

    6 A. I know it was the commander at the time, and

    7 I shall be pleased if I can use the lunch hour to try

    8 to help the people look for this particular document.

    9 I have --

    10 JUDGE MAY: Well, let me interrupt for the

    11 moment. I think we must move on from this topic. If

    12 you can find it, Judge Greve, please bring it. Let's

    13 move on to another topic now.

    14 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, if I may suggest

    15 that it will not be necessary over this lunch break.

    16 We can pursue it tomorrow.

    17 JUDGE MAY: Well, I hope you're not going to

    18 be too long with this witness, Mr. Vucicevic. Perhaps

    19 you would look over the lunch break and we might be

    20 able to finish more quickly.

    21 THE WITNESS: Would it perhaps help you if I

    22 added that the reason I wrote this was also I had

    23 looked for military sources. There were none in

    24 Prijedor and there were none in Banja Luka at the

    25 actual time. So I specifically stated that.

  57. 1 MR. VUCICEVIC:

    2 Q. Yesterday, you testified about the

    3 Prosecution Exhibit, I will get the number, but it's

    4 "CSO Declaration of Bosnia and Herzegovina." Could

    5 you tell us whether you received any information that

    6 you included in your study from the CSO, from the

    7 Organisation of Economic Cooperation in Europe?

    8 A. If I may, the CSO is within the then CSCE,

    9 not OSCE, which is the known Organisation of Security

    10 and Cooperation in Europe. Yes, what they had of

    11 publications, and I dare to say this is a declaration

    12 which was made by them, and when the CSO, or the then

    13 CSCE, made declarations that were published. Those

    14 were published and made available. Among the sources I

    15 approached was every international and national and NGO

    16 agency I could possibly come across that possibly could

    17 have worked in the area. So it was natural for me to

    18 also try to find whatever I could from this agency.

    19 Q. Again, my question was: Did you get any

    20 information on those 400 people that were examined

    21 through OSCE or you didn't, or from them you just got

    22 general information and background information?

    23 A. From the CSO and from the agency, I got

    24 nothing about the 400. Those were separate sources,

    25 and I tried to get the overall understanding and to

  58. 1 compile the information and to see if information from

    2 other sources other than the witnesses would support or

    3 contradict their statements. So it was one of many

    4 sources. I did not obtain it through the witnesses,

    5 and the witnesses, I was not alerted to them through

    6 any of these sources.

    7 Q. In testifying earlier about the particulars

    8 of your study, you testified that you gave instruction

    9 to the investigators in the field to look into

    10 Prijedor, to the conditions in Prijedor before the 1990

    11 election and post-election, and subsequently what

    12 happened after the armed conflict erupted.

    13 In your background, you are an expert on

    14 humanitarian law and on refugees. However, the

    15 statement that was introduced, CSO Declaration

    16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, contains basically, most of it,

    17 military information, who the combatants were; is that

    18 correct?

    19 A. Yes, it is sort of a general declaration that

    20 assesses the overall situation in Bosnia and

    21 Herzegovina, but within this declaration, it also

    22 addresses aspects of what I was studying.

    23 Q. Dr. Greve, you are not an expert on military

    24 law or military activities. In reading the general

    25 papers, you had gotten information just like any other

  59. 1 citizen of the world would, that there was an armed

    2 conflict, and there are various participants in the

    3 armed conflict; isn't that true?

    4 A. I'm not an expert on military issues. I am,

    5 I dare say, reasonably familiar with the law of war,

    6 but that's something different and I shall not testify

    7 to that. I read this as a contemporary historian would

    8 do as one of several pieces of information that should

    9 be considered to try to understand the overall

    10 situation.

    11 Q. So that basically any view that you might

    12 have expressed on the relationship between JNA and the

    13 army of Republika Srpska are not being given as an

    14 expert, but just as a citizen of the world who has

    15 followed the press and reports; isn't that correct?

    16 A. That is not correct. I did consider this, I

    17 think, as a contemporary historian would do, to try to

    18 look at all the different sources and assess the

    19 situation. But it is, of course, correct that I am not

    20 specialised in military issues.

    21 Q. You have used the words "contemporary

    22 historian." Could you list all the courses in the

    23 subject of history --

    24 JUDGE MAY: We don't need to go through

    25 that. The witness was using an expression, not meaning

  60. 1 literally a contemporary historian.

    2 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

    3 A. For your convenience, I may mention that it's

    4 listed on my curriculum vitae that I had one year of

    5 study related to old history, but there are some

    6 courses in history as well, Roman culture.

    7 JUDGE MAY: Very well.


    9 Q. Moving on to Prosecution Exhibit 18, that is

    10 a statement of several military officers of the army of

    11 Republika Srpska; isn't that correct?

    12 A. Yes, I think it's particularly two people who

    13 are quoted and referred to, Colonel Radmilo Zeljaja and

    14 Pero Colic. Excuse me for my pronunciation.

    15 Q. You have emphasised certain aspects of this

    16 article. I'm directing your attention to the full

    17 paragraph 2. You don't have to read it out loud, just

    18 read it for yourself and then we will have some

    19 questions.

    20 A. I have read it.

    21 Q. What is the meaning of Prince Lazar to

    22 the Serb people?

    23 A. I think he is rightly venerated as one of

    24 their most noble, outstanding persons in history. He

    25 died at the battlefield of Kosovo Polje in 1389 when

  61. 1 the Turks were invading.

    2 Q. You mentioned the battle of Kosovo Polje with

    3 Prince Lazar dying in battle. Do you know what

    4 happened to, and I would use the term, "Ottoman

    5 Empire," because Turkey is a nation today that is not a

    6 successor to the Ottoman empire, except in the

    7 historical sense. What happened to the commanding

    8 officer of the opposing army of the Ottoman Empire at

    9 Kosovo Polje?

    10 A. Excuse me. What had happened?

    11 Q. What happened to the Turkish sultan who

    12 opposed Prince Lazar at Kosovo Polje?

    13 A. I believe I don't know that particular

    14 historical person, but as they came to power in the

    15 region, after that, I believe those who opposed Prince

    16 Lazar somehow invaded the area. Maybe I misunderstood

    17 your question.

    18 Q. I will state it. The Ottoman Empire was

    19 coming on to the Balkans, and the decisive battle

    20 whether they would invade the Balkans or not at that

    21 time was on Kosovo Polje. I asked the name of the

    22 Turkish sultan and what happened to him because you

    23 brought it up. If I may jog your memory, his name was

    24 Sultan Murat. Do you know what happened to him at

    25 Kosovo Polje?

  62. 1 A. I'm afraid I do not, Your Honours.

    2 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Vucicevic, we're now getting

    3 rather far away from the subject.

    4 MR. VUCICEVIC: Okay.

    5 A. I should, perhaps, apologise, but I have not

    6 taken the time to go into detail about the complex and,

    7 I'm sure, also a very interesting and important history

    8 of the Serb people.

    9 Q. Indeed, there is a particular meaning in

    10 Serb history that is tied up to the Kosovo battle,

    11 and you have testified to the meaning of that day in

    12 Tadic's case. You're quite aware of that, aren't you?

    13 A. I know that I have mentioned also the battle

    14 of Kosovo Polje in the Tadic case. I am not --

    15 Q. St. Vitus's Day, as you said and Ragodsaj

    16 Vivodan, if that would help you?

    17 A. Yes, St. Vitus is a saint and King Lazar died

    18 on the day of this saint. So in celebrating that day,

    19 one also celebrates the loss of the life of King Lazar

    20 at Kosovo Polje.

    21 Q. This article has been printed on the day

    22 which basically the army of Republika Srpska took as

    23 their day of glory, and that day was what? Because you

    24 testified from this article, and the article --

    25 A. The article is dated 1st of July, 1994.

  63. 1 Q. I direct your attention in the second line of

    2 the first paragraph.

    3 A. Yes, I have read that line.

    4 Q. Is it fair to say that the statements made on

    5 the glory day of the Serb army, which was the same

    6 day as Vidovdan is traditionally a day of glory or day

    7 of martyrdom of Serb people?

    8 A. This is how I read and understand the article

    9 and it would fit with the history, as far as I know it.

    10 Q. Just to take these statements in the proper

    11 context, when two military commanders are talking to

    12 the troops, at least in the countries that do have a

    13 long, long span of history, they do refer to some of

    14 the glory days of their national past. That would be

    15 entirely proper?

    16 A. I appreciate that.

    17 Q. I'm directing your attention to the last two

    18 sentences on the paragraph on page 1 beginning with

    19 "Fate has decided"; can you read that out loud?

    20 A. Excuse me, the last two --

    21 Q. The last two paragraphs on the first page of

    22 Exhibit 18. That's "The Glory of all Serb Glories."

    23 A. Does it start with "But our honourable"?

    24 Q. It starts, "Fate has decided St. Vitus Day to

    25 be the day," the last paragraph on the first page, the

  64. 1 bottom two sentences.

    2 A. Excuse me, yes, I've found it now. "Fate has

    3 decided that St. Vitus Day is to be the day of the

    4 Serbian truth and because of that the Serbs will win

    5 this third World War, too, although it is being waged

    6 only against the Serbs. We will win because we have

    7 firmly decided not to live any longer in brotherhood

    8 with those who slaughter our children and with false

    9 brothers who have spat several times at Serbian

    10 goodness and decency." Did you want me to continue?

    11 Q. No, no. So in making such a statement, a

    12 military officer could reasonably make the statement

    13 believing that it is true what he is saying? You, in

    14 other words --

    15 A. I am not suggesting that he is not believing

    16 what he is saying.

    17 Q. In other words, you're suggesting that what

    18 he is saying, that we have no reason to doubt that he

    19 is, that he is speaking what he believes to be the

    20 truth?

    21 A. He is speaking the way he sees things and

    22 finds it suitable to present it to his troops, yes. I

    23 assume.

    24 Q. I am asking you to read Paragraph No. 2,

    25 starting, "If that honourable Serb nobleman had done

  65. 1 that."

    2 A. "It's not only that that honourable Serb

    3 nobleman had done that, when you're saying to King

    4 Lazar, the Serbian men and people would have

    5 disappeared exactly 605 years ago, the world would have

    6 lacked the most tolerant and greatest people on the

    7 entire planet. In that case, freedom would look

    8 different and Europe would look different today."

    9 Q. From a historical perspective, what is he

    10 relating to?

    11 A. I think he is relating again to the decisive,

    12 as you explained it, battle at Kosovo Polje. And he is

    13 telling them that this was an achievement and that

    14 there are good causes for celebrating this.

    15 Q. In making the statement, are you aware that

    16 the Ottoman Empire reigned Serbian people for 500

    17 years?

    18 A. Yes, I am.

    19 Q. And that statement is, that historical fact

    20 is figured in his statement; is that correct?

    21 A. This is correct. I believe it was together

    22 with Russian brothers and the peace settlement of 1888

    23 that finally they were withdrawn from the area

    24 completely, Serbian area, that is.

    25 Q. I am going to get a map here now. If I may

  66. 1 have this map displayed.

    2 JUDGE MAY: Which exhibit number is that,

    3 please, Mr. Vucicevic?

    4 THE REGISTRAR: It's No. 17.

    5 MR. VUCICEVIC: It's 17, I believe.

    6 Could we have it displayed on the overhead

    7 projector, so that the judges could see it. I mean, if

    8 it would be easier. If the Judges do have a map, we

    9 can look on the map.

    10 THE WITNESS: They were collected yesterday,

    11 I believe.

    12 JUDGE MAY: Judge Cassese points out quite

    13 rightly, this is the one that was withdrawn, in fact,

    14 for the Prosecution to do some redaction.

    15 MS. HOLLIS: Yes, Your Honour, that is

    16 correct.

    17 JUDGE MAY: We don't have copies of it. What

    18 is the point that you're seeking --

    19 MR. VUCICEVIC: The point was that the term,

    20 Krajina, because I was under the misapprehension that

    21 it was admitted only to the fact that it was a map and

    22 all other statements were stricken. But it seems, you

    23 know, that it was withdrawn, I didn't get a point.

    24 JUDGE MAY: What is the point about it now?

    25 MR. VUCICEVIC: The point is if I could use

  67. 1 only this to aid and assist the witness with the next

    2 question.

    3 Q. This is your own drawing, Dr. Greve, right,

    4 these markings, in yellow, right?

    5 A. The yellow is my marking, yes.

    6 Q. And you have used statement, Krajina,

    7 Bosanska Krajina and Croatian Krajina?

    8 A. That is correct.

    9 Q. And do you know the meaning within a

    10 historical context of Krajina?

    11 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Vucicevic, you must

    12 understand that this Trial Chamber now has some

    13 experience of these matters. And, of course, we're not

    14 going to stop you exploring things which are necessary,

    15 but these are matters which I think that we are

    16 familiar with. So there is no need to go over Krajina,

    17 unless there is some particular point that you want to

    18 make about it.

    19 MR. VUCICEVIC: Indeed within the context of

    20 the statement of Colonel Colic is where he is using

    21 that in that case freedom would look different and

    22 Europe would look differently today. It's within that

    23 context that I am going to use -- to explain what he

    24 has meant.

    25 JUDGE MAY: Let me interrupt. If you would

  68. 1 move on from the history as soon as you could.

    2 MR. VUCICEVIC: Absolutely, Your Honour.

    3 JUDGE MAY: Yes, very well.


    5 Q. Are you aware of the fact -- I will go and I

    6 will try to assist with this very quickly to the

    7 witness if I may, Your Honour.

    8 If you're aware that Krajina is a term

    9 translated as a military district. And that the --

    10 after the Ottoman invasion of the Balkan peninsula,

    11 that over the centuries there were the constant clashes

    12 between Christian monarchies to the north and Ottoman

    13 muslims to the south. And the Serbian population being

    14 a Christian that were always sided and protected their

    15 co-faith neighbours to the north. And, in turn, the

    16 Hungarians, Austrians and Italians to the west have

    17 supplied and helped Serbia in their long resistance to

    18 the Turkish occupation. Therefore, that was all of

    19 those areas starting from Belgrade along river Sava

    20 into the northwestern Bosnia, that was all called

    21 Krajina, meaning military district. Do you agree with

    22 me on that?

    23 A. I listened to your explanation and I have no

    24 reason to question it, but I have to admit, I did not

    25 know the Krajina as name used when the Ottoman Empire

  69. 1 advanced after 1389, but I do know and I do appreciate

    2 and I think Europe is grateful for what the Serb people

    3 has done as being sort of guardian of the borders with

    4 the Ottoman Empire and has stopped the advance of the

    5 Ottoman Empire.

    6 Q. And within that, since we have understanding

    7 on that point, I just wanted to say, is it reasonable

    8 to conclude that Colonel Colic was referring to that

    9 fact in that statement? A fact of which a Serb

    10 people are proud and you indicated that, perhaps,

    11 Europe is grateful?

    12 A. I have no reason not to share Europe's

    13 feelings about what the Serbs have done for the

    14 European community in a historical perspective.

    15 JUDGE MAY: The question was, is that what

    16 the general or the colonel was referring to? And it

    17 appears that it was.

    18 So I think, Mr. Vucicevic, you -- just a

    19 moment. These are all matters which we will have to

    20 consider in due course. It will be for us to interpret

    21 the documents. All the witness can do is produce

    22 them. If you want to make any particular points, of

    23 course, you're free to do so, but perhaps we can move

    24 on.


  70. 1 Q. There is in this article, for the first time,

    2 we come across the term "corridor". And that's on page

    3 2, in the middle of the paragraph.

    4 A. I am afraid that it was taken away from me,

    5 so maybe I could have it again. Forgive me for

    6 interrupting.

    7 Q. And --

    8 A. Could I ask you to repeat the reference?

    9 Q. The second page of the Prosecutor's Exhibit

    10 No. 18, the last paragraph, which starts with, "In the

    11 operation to open the so-called corridor." And you can

    12 just read it for yourself and I'll ask you a question.

    13 A. I have read it.

    14 Q. Okay. Are you familiar with the fact that

    15 that corridor was closed, militarily, at the end of April

    16 or beginning of May of 1992?

    17 A. I am not familiar with it as being closed.

    18 That is to say, I am familiar with it being a

    19 battlefield. So when war was waged, there may have

    20 been opening and closing. I did not specifically

    21 consider the entirety of the corridor at every

    22 different time.

    23 Q. So, basically, you just referred in your

    24 testimony to corridor, but you're not familiar with the

    25 military significance or any other significance of the

  71. 1 corridor?

    2 A. I am familiar with the significance of it,

    3 but I am not familiar with day by day, the size of the

    4 corridor, it being fully open or open in part, being

    5 fought over. I know it was a battlefield.

    6 Q. So, since you testified yesterday, the

    7 corridor was important to the Serbs. If I ask a

    8 hypothetical question, tell you, that corridor was

    9 closed militarily by Muslims and Croats and that

    10 Bosnian, that Bosnian Serbs were encircled, would

    11 that help you explain the statements that you have just

    12 read, there were military operations to break down the

    13 blockade? Could that make sense?

    14 A. That could make sense, I suppose.

    15 Q. Thank you. You, in the next exhibit, I mean

    16 the Prosecutor's Exhibit 19, you have made remarks to

    17 the JNA and the connection between SDS and JNA. At the

    18 time that war in Croatia was being waged, the Bosnia

    19 and Herzegovina were a state, a federal unit of the

    20 Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, wasn't it?

    21 A. That's correct.

    22 Q. And the authorities of any nation, sovereign

    23 nation, could issue a mobilisation orders, could they?

    24 A. That's correct.

    25 Q. And in all civilised countries, there are

  72. 1 penalties for not responding to the mobilisation order,

    2 isn't that correct?

    3 A. That's normal.

    4 Q. And in the times of war, the civilian

    5 authorities and political authorities have to cooperate

    6 within the bounds of the laws of that country as a

    7 general proposition?

    8 A. That is the normal situation, yes.

    9 Q. Yes. And, at that time, the citizens of

    10 Prijedor, who responded to the mobilisation orders,

    11 they lawfully carried out their duties, correct?

    12 A. That's correct.

    13 Q. And the war in Croatia ended in December,

    14 roughly, December/November, end of November, beginning

    15 of December of 1992?

    16 A. I believe there was a formal cease fire

    17 agreement beginning of January, 1992.

    18 Q. And the old JNA troops after that time were

    19 being pulled out?

    20 A. They were being withdrawn from Croatia. To

    21 what extent there were any left, I have not the full

    22 knowledge.

    23 Q. So SDS was a party, one of the political

    24 parties in Bosnia at that time?

    25 A. That is correct.

  73. 1 Q. And as the general proposition, the Serbs

    2 mostly responded to this mobilisation, correct?

    3 A. That is all the information I have seen,

    4 yes. At least my information is limited to Prijedor

    5 and the information I have on that is yes.

    6 Q. And the most of the population that didn't

    7 respond to this mobilisations, these mobilisation order

    8 were Croats and Muslims, isn't that correct?

    9 A. These were people who declared themselves as

    10 Croats and Muslims, yes.

    11 Q. And refused to carry out the orders of their,

    12 at that time, independent countries, the country of

    13 which they were citizens and subject to the laws?

    14 A. That's correct.

    15 Q. Is it fair to conclude that this caused a

    16 great discord among those two or three entities, at

    17 least, in Prijedor?

    18 A. It may well have been a reason for that. I

    19 also think that the entire war in Croatia was reason

    20 for people disagreeing or looking differently at that

    21 war.

    22 Q. In this article you also used a term being

    23 called a "Turk" is a derogatory for a Bosnian Muslim.

    24 Are you sure, absolutely sure about that?

    25 A. My understanding from the Muslims is that

  74. 1 they prefer to be called Bosniaks, Muslims,

    2 Prijedorians, whatever, but not to be referred to with

    3 the name of an alien people.

    4 Q. But is that was their preference as of the

    5 later date, perhaps with the modern history that you're

    6 testifying on, or we could look at just a little bigger

    7 expansion. Let's say from 1945 to '95, when the

    8 relationship among the citizens of Prijedor were

    9 normal. Perhaps that could be, hypothetical again,

    10 most of the Muslim population of Bosnia is Slav

    11 population that converted to Islam throughout Ottoman

    12 times, you would agree on that, would you?

    13 A. Yes, I would.

    14 Q. Okay. So for somebody who was an original

    15 faith, it perhaps, could be a compliment to be called,

    16 you are a Turk? If you know, and if you don't, you can

    17 say so.

    18 A. As to my understanding as Defence counsel

    19 rightly pointed out, in the early days, it was the

    20 incoming Ottoman Empire and not a Turkish state. And

    21 it is my understanding that those who, and I have

    22 spoken to some people on this issue because it was not

    23 sort of -- I read it in the testimonies that they saw

    24 it as derogative. And I have spoken with people on a

    25 general basis on the issue later and they say that they

  75. 1 did not find it good. And it had not been common to

    2 speak about Muslims as Turks and it was not

    3 appreciated. That's my understanding. I have just not

    4 spoken to people just after World War II, which was, of

    5 course, prior to my time.

    6 And also, if I may, Turkish history during

    7 World War II, possibly made it less pleasant for anyone

    8 to be referred to as Turkish considering that the

    9 Partisans took power and ruled Yugoslavia after 1945.

    10 Q. Now I am a little bit at sea with that

    11 statement. If you would, I cannot see a connection

    12 between Partisans and--

    13 JUDGE MAY: We're going quite away from the

    14 main point of this case. Can we move on?

    15 MR. VUCICEVIC: Yes, yes, Your Honour.

    16 Q. Dr. Greve, you might have been referring in

    17 your last statement, perhaps World War I, not World War

    18 II and activities of Turkey and independent nations

    19 and --

    20 JUDGE MAY: It really doesn't matter.

    21 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, I'll

    22 move on.

    23 JUDGE MAY: Yes.


    25 Q. In the same article, you are, the same

  76. 1 article contains in the, "For the good of the people."

    2 And if you could read that paragraph and I will have

    3 three or four questions because I think it's rather

    4 important.

    5 A. Excuse me, would you advise me where I find

    6 it?

    7 Q. On the page 2, Exhibit 19. Midsection

    8 titled, "For the good of the people." Second paragraph

    9 in that subheading, starting with, "From the very

    10 start."

    11 A. I have read the paragraph.

    12 Q. Okay. Are you familiar with the name Jovan

    13 Raskovic?

    14 A. Yes, I am.

    15 Q. Could you tell the Court who was he?

    16 A. I know that he was an SDS leader in Krajina.

    17 Krajina in this context being the Croat part of

    18 Krajina. And he was a Serb, who was, at the time, a

    19 Croat national, living in Croatia that was. And he

    20 was one of the people who early spoke up for the

    21 Serb cause in that region as a politician.

    22 Q. Was he a nationalist, a Serb nationalist?

    23 A. I am hesitant to use the word --

    24 Q. That will be fine. Quite so, you know, I

    25 appreciate your hesitancy on this question. We can

  77. 1 define a nationalism as the good nationalism and bad

    2 nationalism. And I would say the good nationalism is

    3 somebody who appreciates his own culture, history,

    4 population, but at the same time doesn't want to hurt

    5 others living in their midst or the people who are

    6 willing to give him them the same civil rights, if

    7 reciprocity exists. You would agree with that?

    8 A. I have no reason to doubt that he was all in

    9 favour of the good of his own people. If he was

    10 unprepared to hurt anyone else and give them full

    11 rights, I have no basis for ascertaining.

    12 Q. But you don't know anything else besides what

    13 you just stated of the late Dr. Jovan Raskovic?

    14 A. No, I have seen references to him in several

    15 articles. I believe I have read some of his early

    16 writings in articles. But as it did not concern

    17 aspects of what I then was addressing, I have not paid

    18 so strong attention to it that I would be able to

    19 repeat it or inform the Court about it.

    20 Q. Within this section here, he is considered

    21 like the ideological father of SDS in Prijedor; isn't

    22 he?

    23 A. I did not read the paragraph to make him the

    24 ideological father. I read him, I read the paragraph

    25 to praise him for having been visionary and having been

  78. 1 positive for the cause of the SDS.

    2 Q. If I were to -- let's assume the fact that

    3 the late Dr. Jovan Raskovic was present when SDS was

    4 established in Prijedor. And if I were to tell you

    5 that fact that his wife is still living is a Croatian,

    6 would he have less base to assume that he was a

    7 vitriolic nationalist?

    8 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, if I may object on

    9 a technical point as to the statement that's being

    10 made. If it's a hypothetical that these are facts,

    11 then perhaps that's a further question. What he is

    12 stating as a fact is he is, in essence, testifying and

    13 I would object to that.

    14 JUDGE MAY: Well, he can put matters -- and,

    15 counsel, I should say, I do deprecate the use of he.

    16 Mr. Vucicevic, if you're referring to him.

    17 Mr. Vucicevic, you can put the matter, but if

    18 you're putting it as a fact, you should do so or if

    19 it's a hypothesis. Again, I don't know that we're

    20 going to much assisted by this. This is going to be

    21 comments by the witness on matters which she really

    22 knows nothing about.

    23 MR. VUCICEVIC: Okay, Your Honour, it's in

    24 the same paragraph, Dr. Greve, there are two terms

    25 mentioned. And one that prominently comes to mind of

  79. 1 anybody who is familiar with the history of Balkan is

    2 Jasenovac, what is Jasenovac?

    3 A. Jasenovac is a concentration camp. One of

    4 the worst. Definitely the worst in World War II,

    5 located not so far from Prijedor on the border inside

    6 Croatia.

    7 JUDGE MAY: I am going to interrupt you. We

    8 are familiar with these matters. In a case we have

    9 recently done, there was extensive evidence about

    10 Jasenovac, so there is no need to go over that again.

    11 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you very much, Your

    12 Honour. As the legal principles and due processes we

    13 are applying here. And then I am asking, not some

    14 latitude, but the concern that I have.

    15 JUDGE MAY: You can make any point that you

    16 want, but would you bear in mind that we have heard

    17 evidence in other matters about it.

    18 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, if this witness

    19 was not present there and when that evidence was

    20 introduced and this witness' testimony contains those

    21 statements and she has testified to --

    22 JUDGE MAY: Let's not waste any more time

    23 about it. The only point I want you to have in mind is

    24 that the Trial Chamber is not ignorant of the history,

    25 is familiar with it, and so, therefore, what I am

  80. 1 concerned about is that we don't spend too much time

    2 going over matters which are not going to assist us in

    3 the long run in trying the case because we know about

    4 them.

    5 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, but --

    6 JUDGE MAY: Let's move on.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: Okay.

    8 Q. Having heard this ruling, Dr. Greve, I have

    9 to point out in the Tadic's testimony, you have

    10 testified about the influence of the Serb press to

    11 the media, on to the state of mind of the Serb

    12 population in Prijedor area, have you?

    13 A. Yes, I have.

    14 Q. And and what was the influence of the Serb

    15 press on the state of mind of the citizens of

    16 Prijedor?

    17 A. The understanding which is given from the

    18 witness statements from all of the sources is that

    19 opposed to previous years, one starts speaking about

    20 the Muslims as being people prepared as fanatics to

    21 start a religious war. And one refers to the Croats as

    22 being hands to the very, very bad Ustasha behavior.

    23 Q. Could you, please, explain who were Ustashas?

    24 A. Ustashas, to my knowledge, was first a

    25 minority party. Perhaps it was with past religion in

  81. 1 Croatia. It was -- its leaders were more or less

    2 living in fascist Italy and raised by the fascists in

    3 Italy. And when the Germans started World War II, they

    4 came into power in then independent Croatia, which also

    5 covered Bosnia-Herzegovina. And they had an extreme,

    6 terrible, utterly ugly policy of treating all Serbs

    7 extremely bad. That is, I believe they had as part of

    8 their programme, that they wanted to convert one-third

    9 of the Serbs to the Roman Catholic faith, whilst to

    10 excise one-third of the Serbs. And, even worse, to

    11 exterminate the final third of the Serbs. That is all

    12 Serbs living within that area.

    13 As it came out in Prijedor, if I may draw

    14 your attention to that, is an area that was early

    15 controlled by the Partisan and suffered tremendously in

    16 1942. At that time, it is my information, that the

    17 Germans, the Austrians, at the time, of course, one

    18 time, met the Secretary-General of the United Nations

    19 who was number two in the command in Banja Luka. So

    20 this is an area that's been sort of investigated by a

    21 number of different, not so open sources, but it has

    22 been investigated. And this joint forces, Austrian,

    23 German, Ustasha and a fraction of the Chetnik movement,

    24 not all Chetniks, but also a fraction of the Chetniks,

    25 committed extreme atrocities in 1942, July of 1942, in

  82. 1 the Prijedor area, which is why one of the main

    2 monuments, war monuments and memorials in former

    3 Yugoslavia, from World War II, was in Prijedor.

    4 Q. And Jasenovac was just in the same area,

    5 wasn't it?

    6 A. It's a bit further to the east and the

    7 North. It's on the other side of the Croatian border.

    8 Yes, well, I could point it out on a map, but it's

    9 further north and east. But it's in the same larger

    10 area, not within the opstina, not within

    11 Bosnia-Herzegovina, but, yes.

    12 Q. About 30 kilometres away?

    13 A. I would have guessed more, but...

    14 Q. Okay.

    15 A. Prijedor, if you think of it, the size of

    16 Prijedor, it's perhaps something like 25 by 30

    17 kilometres, so somehow a rectangular shape. But this

    18 is approximate of course.

    19 Q. You mentioned Ustasha and also mentioned the

    20 context of this paragraph is that they had a policy of

    21 exterminating at least one-third of the Serbian

    22 people. And that's what I understand in the history

    23 and tell me if you agree with me, that they were

    24 exterminating regardless, men, women and children?

    25 A. That's my understanding, absolutely. And I

  83. 1 would not be surprised if they have actually also

    2 exterminated more than they had in their programme.

    3 Their policy was utterly inhumane.

    4 Q. One minor point that you mentioned that the

    5 former Secretary General of the United Nations was a

    6 second in command in that area and that event was

    7 investigated, but not as openly as perhaps it should

    8 have been to give the picture to the world of what had

    9 happened, if you agree?

    10 A. I don't know why the information about such

    11 investigations were not disclosed, but such

    12 investigations were carried out. And, in my opinion,

    13 it would have been fair to publish information also

    14 about what had happened during World War II. When I

    15 said he was number two within the intelligence unit,

    16 number two in command in Banja Luka. I have heard that

    17 that's number three in the overall command. I am not

    18 able to say yes or no.

    19 Q. And you are aware there was some survivors

    20 from those Ustasha camps around surrounding Prijedor?

    21 A. I am aware of that and also, very

    22 unfortunately, but people from Prijedor after the

    23 slaughter, after the horrors of July of 1942, was taken

    24 in part to Jasenovac, but some of them were actually

    25 also taken under the label "viking" to my country,

  84. 1 which is Norway as slave labour, taken to the Nazi

    2 minority government in Norway and treated extremely

    3 badly. I did gather from sources in Belgrade the exact

    4 lists of all the names of people who came to Norway

    5 from the Prijedor area after what had happened in

    6 1942. The majority of those were Serbs, but there were

    7 also Croats and Muslims among them. Very

    8 unfortunately, but a number died in my country.

    9 Q. And the ruling from those great sufferings of

    10 the former, of the internees in the Nazi camps, in

    11 Norway, subsequently, there was, you know, a

    12 friendship, associations formed between people of

    13 Norway and people in Yugoslavia and quite a few visits

    14 have taken place, if you followed anything there?

    15 A. Yes, I am familiar; yes, I followed; yes,

    16 there is a strong friendship between the people of the

    17 former Yugoslavia and Norway.

    18 JUDGE MAY: Very well, we'll adjourn now.

    19 How much longer do you anticipate being with this

    20 witness, Mr. Vucicevic?

    21 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, we are going to

    22 review the facts of the exhibits with this witness and

    23 maybe, perhaps, Mr. Vann will ask a few questions

    24 because in preparing for this witness, we have had the

    25 first statement. And we are thinking, you know, that

  85. 1 he was going to do a cross-examination. But, however,

    2 when the exhibits were introduced and Mr. Vann had come

    3 in just about ten, fifteen days ago, then I have to go

    4 over these statements because, you know, I have been on

    5 the case from the very beginning.

    6 JUDGE MAY: We'll consider the matter. But

    7 as a matter of practice, only one cross-examination is

    8 going to be allowed. I'll consider an application if

    9 you want to make one. But the normal practice is one

    10 cross-examination per defendant.

    11 I hope that matters can be speeded.

    12 Obviously this witness is here, having to stay here.

    13 And also, we have to think of the clock generally for

    14 the trial.

    15 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, I appreciate

    16 your kind words. Your Honour, this is the first

    17 witness testifying on issues and the ultimate issues of

    18 fact in historical terms, quite candid witness, and I

    19 believe her function to aid the Court to see that most

    20 objects the picture. That is our intent. And if it

    21 takes a little longer, Your Honour, I do apologise.

    22 JUDGE MAY: Five past two.

    23 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.40 p.m.



  86. 1 --- On resuming at 2.10 p.m.

    2 (Closed session)











    13 Page 236 redacted – in closed session













  87. 1












    13 Page 237 redacted – in closed session













  88. 1 (redacted)

    2 (redacted)

    3 (redacted)

    4 (redacted)

    5 (redacted)

    6 (redacted)

    7 (redacted)

    8 (redacted)

    9 (redacted)

    10 (redacted)

    11 (redacted)

    12 (redacted)

    13 (redacted)

    14 (redacted)

    15 (redacted)

    16 (redacted)

    17 (redacted)

    18 (redacted)

    19 (redacted)

    20 (Open session)

    21 MR. VUCICEVIC: While we have a short

    22 intermission, if I may answer the question on

    23 citations, I asked the witness about methodology

    24 earlier. That's at page 609 from the Tadic transcript

    25 and it's line 29.

  89. 1 (The witness entered court)

    2 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Vucicevic?


    4 Q. We had left off with the statements about

    5 Serbian media and the reporting of the current events.

    6 In introducing Mr. Mazowiecki's report, you have

    7 testified that Serb media in Prijedor, as far as you

    8 were concerned, being your area of expertise, have been

    9 inflammatory, derogatory, and reports that were

    10 inciting people to genocide. Is that a fair conclusion

    11 of your testimony of yesterday?

    12 A. That was inciting people to have a less good

    13 view on other people in the opstina, yes.

    14 Q. So it was not your testimony that the press

    15 was inciting them to commit violations of international

    16 humanitarian law, but were contributing to a lack of

    17 goodwill towards the different ethnicities?

    18 A. It was not directly suggesting that they

    19 should commit genocide, it was not putting words like

    20 that, but it was spoken of in a very hostile manner.

    21 Q. We can take the general proposition that we

    22 all believe in free press; do you agree with that?

    23 A. Yes, I do.

    24 Q. Even if some events might be unpleasant and

    25 might present as offensive to the opposing ethnic

  90. 1 group, if they are reported, they are still subject to

    2 this interpretation of free press, as a general

    3 proposition?

    4 A. In general, yes, if the press is free, one

    5 may print different issues in it. This is one element

    6 in an overall situation.

    7 Q. Considering Yugoslavia from 1945 through

    8 1990, to the best of your knowledge, did Yugoslavia

    9 have a free press?

    10 A. I'm not fully familiar with the freedom of

    11 the press. I would think that it was not fully free,

    12 but I'm not able to evaluate that.

    13 Q. But for the short period of democracy in

    14 Prijedor, we can say the press was free?

    15 A. I think the press changed its approach

    16 because it was made, to the best of my understanding, a

    17 matter of urgency for the new authorities, that is, the

    18 Serb authorities, after taking power the night of the

    19 30th of April, 1992, to have control over the media.

    20 Q. However, you have testified only as to the

    21 Mazowiecki report, you have testified only as to bias

    22 in Serb media. Have you noticed anything in that

    23 report that addressed the possible bias in the media of

    24 the other ethnic groups?

    25 A. It is referring to numerous concerns, yes. I

  91. 1 was particularly evaluating the information that could

    2 relate to the problems I was addressing in the area of

    3 Prijedor.

    4 Q. So if you look at the territory of

    5 Bosnia-Herzegovina in that report, it would seem that

    6 press from all sides was biased?

    7 A. It's indicated by Mazowiecki that there were

    8 problems, yes.

    9 Q. Do you consider it a bias if the Serb

    10 press is referring to the events of Jasenovac that you

    11 earlier testified? Would that be a bias or would that

    12 be a reporting of the historical events?

    13 A. If it's mainly reporting the historical

    14 events, there is no bias. It may be a bias if, without

    15 documentation, it is stated that a new Jasenovac is

    16 being considered.

    17 Q. Have you found any statements that said that

    18 a new Jasenovac is being considered? You can answer

    19 that at some time later. We don't have to look now,

    20 but it would be interesting to find out. If I may

    21 proceed, we can put it off until later.

    22 JUDGE MAY: Yes, we will deal with it later.

    23 A. It is in paragraph -- as I read, if I may, on

    24 page 2 in what was given to me prior to the -- it's

    25 Exhibit 19, the Kozarski Vjesnik article "Faithful to

  92. 1 the Homeland and its Ideals," page 2, second paragraph

    2 underneath the headline "For the Good of the People,"

    3 and I quote from the second sentence: "We used all our

    4 resources to support the struggle of the Serb people

    5 against new and old ustashas, against the new genocide

    6 which was being prepared in places that are too well

    7 known to us, Jasenovac, Jadovna," et cetera, reference

    8 to the past is not biased, but it may be different when

    9 one suggests that there were plans to build or to

    10 continue in the way things were done during World War

    11 II.


    13 Q. So if the author of this paragraph or the

    14 gentleman that was quoted to have said such a

    15 paragraph, Mr. Ranko Gnjatovic, had veritable

    16 apprehension at the time that the camps like Jasenovac

    17 could occur, he didn't have a right to speak about it

    18 or didn't have a right to report about it; is that what

    19 you're referring to --

    20 A. No.

    21 Q. -- as incitement through the press?

    22 A. If he had information to that extent, of

    23 course he would be not only free to speak about it, but

    24 he should speak about it.

    25 Q. But you haven't talked, as you said before,

  93. 1 to any of the Serbs, so we really cannot conclude

    2 whether or not at this point there was such

    3 information. That is your opinion, that he had no

    4 information, without any data to substantiate that?

    5 A. I have not seen in all the sources I've

    6 reviewed any concrete information as to that, no.

    7 Q. Let's go to Mazowiecki's report. When it's

    8 dealing with the reporting of the Bosnian Muslim press,

    9 especially Radio Hajat, do you remember that section of

    10 Mazowiecki's report?

    11 A. I'm afraid I do not because I did not attempt

    12 to, sort of, judge all of his statements on every

    13 issue. I believe that Mazowiecki has solid reason for

    14 saying many of the things that he was saying. I was

    15 testifying yesterday to what he had said about the

    16 media. It's dated after I finished my report, but it

    17 does support the conclusions to which I reached

    18 concerning media in Prijedor.

    19 Q. I'm referring you to page 9 or date stamped

    20 790 on the bottom of Mazowiecki's report.

    21 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness have the

    22 exhibit. It's Exhibit 27.


    24 Q. Paragraph 32, I'm directing your attention to

    25 the last sentence starting "On 1 April 1993." Could

  94. 1 you read that statement, please?

    2 A. On 1 April 1993, the Tuzla journal Zmaj od

    3 Bosne published an article which stated,

    4 "Instinctively, every Muslim would wish to save his

    5 Serb neighbour instead of the reverse; however, every

    6 Muslim must name a Serb and take an oath to kill him."

    7 Q. Looking at the plain language of that

    8 statement, does it sound to you as an incitement to

    9 break international humanitarian law?

    10 A. Yes, it does.

    11 Q. And it was published on?

    12 A. 1st April, 1993.

    13 Q. And Zmaj od Bosne is the print media

    14 published in Tuzla which was, at that time, under

    15 Bosnian government control, wasn't it?

    16 A. I don't know, but if you stated this like

    17 this, I accept that information.

    18 Q. Thank you. Paragraph 30, the same page, last

    19 sentence in that paragraph 30, "An example was Radio

    20 Hajat ..." Could you read that, please?

    21 A. Would you like me to read it?

    22 Q. Yes.

    23 A. An example was Radio Hajat's call on 5th

    24 February, 1994 following the massacre at Markale

    25 marketplace for Muslims to retaliate against Sarajevo's

  95. 1 Serbs and Croats."

    2 Q. Have you read this paragraph before you

    3 testified yesterday on it?

    4 A. I have --

    5 Q. The whole report?

    6 A. I have read the whole report at a previous

    7 time, yes.

    8 Q. All right. Are you familiar with Markale

    9 marketplace massacre?

    10 A. I am familiar with the overall of that, yes.

    11 It was also included in the report of the Commission of

    12 Experts, although I was not the one who was

    13 particularly looking at it.

    14 Q. Could you tell us about that massacre?

    15 JUDGE MAY: Now, again --

    16 MR. VUCICEVIC: I'll withdraw the question,

    17 Your Honour.

    18 JUDGE MAY: Very well.


    20 Q. The sentence that you just read, looking at

    21 the plain meaning of the language, to the best of your

    22 expertise, does it incite and invite the population of

    23 Sarajevo to commit violations of the international

    24 humanitarian laws against Serbs and Croats?

    25 A. It's an invitation to retaliation, and I

  96. 1 would assume that means also to break the law, I'm

    2 afraid.

    3 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honours, if I may

    4 address on this specific point. We have an expert here

    5 on international humanitarian law, and I would like to

    6 ask her to clarify the term "retaliate" because of her

    7 stature. I really wouldn't want this to go on the

    8 record uncorrected for the learned benefit of all of

    9 us.

    10 JUDGE MAY: Well, you can ask the question,

    11 but keep it brief.


    13 Q. Under international humanitarian law, is

    14 retaliation a measure even arguably permitted by a

    15 civilian population?

    16 A. To my knowledge, retaliation, as such, is not

    17 a part of international law. One may not answer to a

    18 crime, I'm speaking in general terms without reference

    19 to Sarajevo or anywhere else, one may not answer a

    20 crime with a new crime. There may be occasions of

    21 provocation, but retaliation is not a concept that's

    22 included in international law and duly described. But

    23 since they are asked to retaliate in terms of a

    24 massacre, I'm afraid this could include new crimes.

    25 Q. So is it or isn't it incitement to commit

  97. 1 violations of international humanitarian law?

    2 A. As it's not stated explicitly that no crimes

    3 should be made, it may be read like you're stating,

    4 yes.

    5 JUDGE MAY: I think that's sufficient on that

    6 topic.


    8 Q. In your previous testimony, you have said

    9 that the violation of international humanitarian law in

    10 the Prijedor area throughout World War II has been

    11 committed by Ustasha and supported by the government at

    12 that time, the independent government of Croatia. Were

    13 there any incidents that you know of where similar acts

    14 were committed by Serb nationals on Muslims or

    15 Croats?

    16 A. I have read wartime history. I am aware that

    17 certain Chetnik groups, not all Chetniks, by far not,

    18 would target explicitly Muslim people in some areas. I

    19 am not able to point to, in detail, specific incidents

    20 from World War II.

    21 JUDGE MAY: Well, Judge Greve, you are not

    22 here really to deal with World War II, and I'm not

    23 going to permit any more questions on it.

    24 Mr. Vucicevic, could you move on, please?


  98. 1 Q. Judge Greve, you have testified in your

    2 statement about peacefulness and brotherhood between

    3 ethnicities in Prijedor. Could you explain the meaning

    4 of "brotherhood" and where it came into the modern

    5 historical terminology?

    6 A. To my understanding, there were very friendly

    7 relations between the different groups in Prijedor.

    8 That is to say, it was not an area which was troubled

    9 by ethnic feuds or religious feuds. They were living

    10 together as people in any ordinary community or society

    11 which would not have much differences between them.

    12 It's my understanding that they themselves

    13 saw at least this century as having been a century of

    14 botherhood, which had been particularly strengthened

    15 during World War II, as this was an area where, as an

    16 example, the Muslim head of the community very early

    17 spoke up and against the Ustasha attacks on Serbs in

    18 World War II, and where the Partisans comprised of the

    19 local population which were Serbs, the majority were

    20 Serbs, Croats and Muslims.

    21 For what reason they fought together during

    22 World War II, and some of the people that have

    23 testified had said that even upon entering Logor

    24 Omarska, Logor Keraterm, the camps, they did not really

    25 think those who were arrested, having not experienced

  99. 1 attacks on entire villages, that this would be

    2 something very difficult for them.

    3 Even after the Serbs took power, the ousted

    4 Muslim mayor of the community spoke on the radio, Radio

    5 Prijedor, in early May saying "Remember the

    6 brotherhood, sisterhood," perhaps he didn't say that,

    7 but "... brotherhood, remember the good relations.

    8 There are people coming from outside. They have taken

    9 power. We have nothing to fear. This is essentially a

    10 peaceful community."

    11 By this, I'm not suggesting that it didn't

    12 have the same kinds of problems that just any community

    13 would have.

    14 Q. The concept brotherhood was imposed by the

    15 communists taking over power in 1945, isn't that true?

    16 A. I know that the word "brotherhood" is used in

    17 my own country, which has never been --

    18 Q. But I am referring directly to the concept of

    19 Bosnia, brotherhood is very broad term?

    20 A. That is why I -- without knowing it for sure,

    21 cannot say that this was brought in by the communists,

    22 it's a very common concept. Perhaps, at least, I would

    23 assume it existed in the wartime.

    24 Q. So, at least, you're not sure on this

    25 question?

  100. 1 A. No, I have not asked specifically when the

    2 concept brotherhood was started to be used.

    3 Q. But yet in presenting statistics, did it

    4 raise some concerns of yours to realise that most of

    5 the villages were entirely Muslim, entirely Serb and

    6 entirely Croats?

    7 A. If I --

    8 Q. And how could you reconcile brotherhood and

    9 in unity with such segregation?

    10 A. If I may draw your attention again back to

    11 the statistics from the census. I believe it can be

    12 read out of the figures, not so easily from the

    13 simplified map, but from the figures that in almost

    14 every village, you would find a mixed population --

    15 Q. Let's go back to the tables, Dr. Greve, and

    16 then maybe we can explain this better to the Court.

    17 And I am directing your attention to -- okay, that's

    18 page 202 or that is Exhibit 21B. And then we go --

    19 let's look at village called Bistrica. That is the

    20 third row from the bottom of the page. Date stamped

    21 201. And it does have 1490 Serbs and 1 Muslim. And

    22 then if we go to a next village, Biscani, we have a

    23 little better ratio, 1150 Muslims and 2 Serbs. And

    24 let's look at some other, bigger villages. That would

    25 be at page 203 because it seems that this is a big

  101. 1 spread which has been cut?

    2 A. That's correct. It's two opposite pages.

    3 Q. And if we take a look at the village

    4 Carakovo, where there is 2128 Muslims and 38 Serbs --

    5 JUDGE MAY: Those figures, I think, are in

    6 1981, in fact.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: 1981. But they have been

    8 introduced and I believe, substantially, they have not

    9 changed, Your Honour. But we can go into the '91

    10 census.

    11 JUDGE MAY: I am not inviting you to.


    13 Q. But basically I am drawing your attention

    14 here and I want to find out the names of these

    15 villages.

    16 A. The names are listed on the left-hand side.

    17 Q. Here we go. And there is, for example, a

    18 village, Surkovac, which contains 647 Croats; no

    19 Muslims and 18 Serbs. This is not a statistically

    20 representative sample, however, it's just indication,

    21 there was no integration whatsoever of the population,

    22 in spite of that catch phrase "brotherhood," isn't that

    23 true?

    24 A. As I read the entire statistics, I think it's

    25 much more mixed than the history samples suggested.

  102. 1 But, yes, it's correct, there will be a lot of

    2 variations.

    3 Q. And as I have a duty of fairness to the

    4 Court, I am going to point out to the town of Prijedor,

    5 which basically the population was about 50/50. Okay.

    6 That's on date stamp 205 and then it's '81. We're

    7 still looking at '81. But that is 10,000 Muslims at

    8 that time and 10,000 Serbs. '91 there was about 24,000

    9 Serbs. However there is this category of Yugoslavs.

    10 Could you tell the Court a little bit more about that

    11 category?

    12 A. That was a category which does not state

    13 which ethnic group or religion the person has. People

    14 may want to declare themselves as Yugoslavs belonging

    15 to any other group. Where they have the freedom of

    16 choice in that respect, many would choose the

    17 designation Yugoslav as a commitment to the Yugoslav

    18 state. Others have chosen that for the reason that

    19 they may have two grandparents in one group and one in

    20 each of the others, not feeling they belonged, perhaps,

    21 to any specific group. And some may have, for any

    22 other reason, found it good not to be identified with a

    23 group.

    24 Q. Isn't it fair, also reasonable to conclude

    25 there might be one reason and one conclusion. But it

  103. 1 would be another reasonable conclusion that a census at

    2 that time provided for the people to declare how they

    3 feel and whom they belong. And what we see that most

    4 of those villages and hamlets are exclusively,

    5 overwhelmingly, either Serb, Muslim or Croat without

    6 any mix in municipality besides town of Prijedor?

    7 A. As for the mix, I think the figures speak for

    8 themselves. I mean, it could be controlled village by

    9 village the exact numbers according to the figure. It

    10 is correct that people were free to come forward and

    11 declare themselves as belonging to a group, yes.

    12 Q. Would it be also reasonable to conclude that

    13 mixing in the rural areas did not occur because of the

    14 memories on the atrocities of the World War II?

    15 A. That is not to my opinion correct. It may

    16 not in full, it may be in part. That is, there are a

    17 number of people who have left Prijedor who have mixed

    18 family relationships, mixed parentage and, perhaps

    19 also, as we came across, decided to declare themselves

    20 when they married someone from a different group they

    21 could, as well, declare themselves as belonging with

    22 that group.

    23 Q. So they have basically converted and declared

    24 themselves. And one of those famous, one of the most

    25 famous Yugoslavs who converted, if you know, was a

  104. 1 Yugoslav Nobel prize winner for the literature,

    2 Ivanovic. And he was born Croat, but declared himself

    3 Serb and one of the Serbs greatest literary giants.

    4 Are you familiar with that? So we agree that the

    5 people do convert for their own reason and, indeed,

    6 join the other ethnic group. But as we are looking in

    7 these papers here, their declarations are such that

    8 this is overwhelming segregation in all the areas or

    9 municipality of Prijedor, besides Prijedor itself?

    10 A. I do not agree that it's overwhelming

    11 segregation in all the areas.

    12 Q. I am going to modify that term. Segregation

    13 that is of some concern. Would you agree with that?

    14 A. Yes.

    15 Q. Considering that they had official policy of

    16 brotherhood?

    17 A. I think that brotherhood could be understood

    18 in more than one sense. And I think a feeling of

    19 brotherhood may mean that people in an area with

    20 several villages, several different administrative

    21 units, do not feel alienated and hostile towards one

    22 another, but still they may keep their small hamlets,

    23 or whatever, which is -- and some of those which you

    24 have pointed out, are predominantly with people

    25 declaring themselves as belonging to one particular

  105. 1 group, yes.

    2 Q. That reminds me of the old adage, that in the

    3 former communist system some people are more free than

    4 the others. And it seems here that distribution or

    5 ethnic distribution in Prijedor municipality is such

    6 that they trusted their own a little bit more than the

    7 others, so they had their houses in the same location,

    8 isn't that true?

    9 A. I will not be able, as I have not asked

    10 people that particular question.

    11 Q. Okay, thank you on that one.

    12 When you look to this answer to this one

    13 might become indeed obvious when you look at the map of

    14 Prijedor. This map of Prijedor. Sorry, I lost the

    15 marking on this one.

    16 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 22.

    17 MR. VUCICEVIC: Exhibit 22.

    18 Q. So when you look at the colour distribution

    19 here, it's obvious to see that the Muslims were located

    20 in a south-western section of the Municipality of

    21 Prijedor and Serbs were located in southeastern

    22 municipality of Prijedor. And there is a great

    23 concentration of Muslim population in Kozarusa,

    24 Kozarac, Brdani, Babici area. Those are along the

    25 road. There is no road there, but you are familiar

  106. 1 with the maps along the road from Prijedor to Banja

    2 Luka. And there is a concentration of the Serbs again

    3 straight north from Prijedor.

    4 A. Yes, that is the simplification and the

    5 predominant ethnic group.

    6 Q. And yet on the next exhibit, which is your

    7 drawing, it's Exhibit 24, you have declared that

    8 Prijedor and municipalities in Prijedor and Sanski Most

    9 and Kotor Varos are the Muslim municipalities. What

    10 did you mean -- what is your intended purpose of this

    11 different colouration?

    12 A. The different colouration refers to the fact

    13 that the opstinas, the municipalities that have been

    14 given a red colour had such a large Serb influence,

    15 not a total Serb population, but such a large Serb

    16 influence, that it was decided within the opstina to

    17 join the autonomous region of Krajina as referred to

    18 yesterday, as opposed to the three others opstinas,

    19 Prijedor, Sanski Most, Kotor Varos, while, yes, there

    20 were large populations that were Serbs. There were

    21 small populations, essentially Croat. And there were

    22 relatively large populations that were Muslim. And in

    23 these three opstinas, municipalities, the Serb

    24 influence was not that strong that a decision was made

    25 by the local authorities to join the autonomous region

  107. 1 of Krajina. That was the only reason for giving them

    2 different colours.

    3 Q. I am going to take you back to time of

    4 election in 1990, December of 1990. And the result of

    5 that election was, as you have testified in Tadic's

    6 case and your report that was introduced in this case,

    7 that the SDA had obtained 30 electoral seats; that the

    8 SDS had 28; Croat party had 2 seats and the others,

    9 meaning the parties who were liberal parties or

    10 remnants and followers of the old communist left,

    11 obtained another 30 seats. Is that correct?

    12 A. That is correct.

    13 Q. And that members of SDA and SDS formed a

    14 coalition municipal government in Prijedor; is that

    15 correct?

    16 A. The municipal assembly, I think reflected the

    17 overall vote, yes.

    18 Q. But there was an agreement between SDA and

    19 SDS to run the coalition campaign against the ruling

    20 communist party up to that time. Are you familiar with

    21 that?

    22 A. I am not familiar with pre-1990 election

    23 campaigning. But I am familiar with the fact that,

    24 yes, the SDA and the SDS did cooperate, did win 30 and

    25 28 seats respectfully and did divide the remaining

  108. 1 seats among them accordingly.

    2 Q. You're not familiar with any pre-election

    3 agreements. Let's say no agreements existed as a

    4 hypothetical and the election takes place and this is

    5 an electoral composition, the government has to be

    6 formed. So each party had free choice. SDA could join

    7 the communist parties or reformist liberal SD socialist

    8 party and another party, or they could join the SDS in

    9 forming government. Likewise, SDS couldn't join

    10 parties of the left that were defeated in that election

    11 or let's say there was almost three way split. Why

    12 would you think that SDA and SDS would make such a

    13 coalition?

    14 A. I would assume that also that naturally under

    15 the circumstances, if it was a reaction to the previous

    16 regimes, I am unable to say. But I would assume that

    17 under the new political situation, they saw that as

    18 useful and making sense, the way they have committed

    19 themselves with the veto voters.

    20 Q. And those commitments in taking down to

    21 totalitarian government, which did not recognise a

    22 right to free religious expression, would be reasonable

    23 to assume that members of SDA wanted to have

    24 democratically elected officers and to practice their

    25 religion. At the same time, members or the people

  109. 1 having sympathies in voting for the representatives of

    2 the SDS would like to have democratically elected

    3 government and to practice their religion. And those

    4 would be including another underlining theme that

    5 democratically elected government would provide the

    6 bulwark for the economy so that the society would

    7 thrive. Based on those principles, is it reasonable to

    8 assume that they have formed coalition government?

    9 A. Based on what we know in general about what

    10 happened in eastern Europe, when free elections started,

    11 there were to be close cooperation between political

    12 parties that were of the new political creed, so to

    13 speak and those parties who preferred the previous

    14 system. So I would assume in Prijedor, making a

    15 general statement, that is, and it's an assumption, I

    16 would think they would work together with those who

    17 believed in the new, free situation.

    18 Q. So it's reasonable to assume that even those

    19 who are members of the party at that time did not

    20 harbour ill-feelings toward each other because they

    21 were cooperating? I am not asking the specifics, just,

    22 would it be reasonable to assume.

    23 A. It is, of course, difficult to assess the

    24 feelings of people. But since the general

    25 understanding in Prijedor is that of brotherhood and

  110. 1 cooperation, I assume that was for the politicians as

    2 well. It may have changed over time, but I think so.

    3 But I think the main changes may have come when

    4 parallel structures started to come into being.

    5 Q. Do you think that war in Croatia preceded

    6 those improvisations along the ethnic lines starting

    7 with the outbreak of war in Croatia?

    8 A. I know that there were political discussions

    9 about, and I believe they are materialised in

    10 guidelines which I have seen later, only after having

    11 completed my study. There were discussions within the

    12 SDS, the Serb Democratic Party, already in August,

    13 1991. That is just after the -- just before or just

    14 after the war in Croatia really started. And at that

    15 time, alternative structures were in question. I am in

    16 August 1991.

    17 Q. You think -- do you have any information that

    18 an ethnic cleansing of Serb population took place in

    19 the war in Croatia?

    20 A. I have information to the extent that when

    21 war started in Eastern Slavonia, group was against

    22 group, and yes, indeed, some of the victims were

    23 clearly Serb.

    24 Q. Do you think that such an information could

    25 have had a real impact on the Serbs in Prijedor area?

  111. 1 A. Yes, I think, actually, it did have an

    2 impact, particularly because it was highlighted in the

    3 media and it was used to generalise the feeling of fear

    4 and a need for Serbs to be particularly alert.

    5 Q. And are you aware of any reports in the

    6 western press that have reported ethnic cleansing of

    7 Serbs in Croatia at that time?

    8 A. I cannot point to any specific information,

    9 but I do believe that it was reported and I think it

    10 was transmitted, if not straight by journalists, so at

    11 least by the High Commission for Refugees, the United

    12 Nations High Commission for Refugees, that numbers of

    13 people were being displaced in Eastern Slavonia, Serbs

    14 among them.

    15 Q. And the United Nations international

    16 organisation of countries of Western Europe, that later

    17 on helped stop that war, hadn't done anything at that

    18 time, to the best of your knowledge?

    19 A. To the best of my knowledge, at that time,

    20 the western community was concerned with negotiations,

    21 which had been going on for some time. It had been discussed

    22 in the European Community. It had been discussed in

    23 international agencies based in Europe, but I would say

    24 it was paperwork, conferences, discussions. I think

    25 everyone thought at that time that this war could be

  112. 1 avoided by having peaceful settlement around a

    2 conference table.

    3 Q. So it would be reasonable to assume, since

    4 ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Slavonia had occurred and

    5 some of the official organisations of the European

    6 ommunity had reports about that, but it was only

    7 expectation that a war should be short-lived. It was

    8 reasonable for Serb in Krajina to be apprehensive about

    9 it. I am not asking whether they were wrong or right,

    10 but was it just reasonable for them to be

    11 apprehensive?

    12 A. I am just trying to focus my answer. I am

    13 not trying to make judgments on this, just to assess

    14 the situation and my observations. I didn't know if

    15 the word "ethnic cleansing" was used already in Eastern

    16 Slavonia in early August 1991. I do know that large

    17 groups of people, Serbs included, were actually

    18 displaced in the course of the fighting between Croats,

    19 essentially, and Serbs, essentially. I do know that at

    20 a later time, this was used, highlighted, emphasised

    21 and I think ordinary people were scared. But still I

    22 think that in Prijedor, people were relying on the

    23 past. They have had very, very different experience

    24 during World War II in terms of having been a Partisan

    25 area that was hard hit by non-Partisans. But at that

  113. 1 time -- and that has been confirmed by numerous

    2 sources. They felt they were standing together and

    3 that that togetherness in the past would bring them

    4 through whatever difficult times were to come.

    5 Q. But that is your conclusion about that they

    6 felt they were in a Noah's Ark, so to speak, just

    7 because they had a partisan in the midst of World War

    8 II and without paying attention of the current events

    9 in the rest of their country?

    10 A. Yes and no. I think, yes, they did pay

    11 attention to what was happening elsewhere. Yes, I

    12 think most people were very concerned about there being

    13 a war. Yes, I think they followed that very

    14 intensely. But, no, I don't think they were also

    15 afraid of being hunted -- they didn't feel as hunted by

    16 the past experiences of one group of people locally

    17 against another. They had a different background and

    18 experience which made it more easy for them to relate

    19 to their neighbours than for Serbs in Eastern

    20 Slavonia.

    21 Q. Your Honours, at this time, I would like to

    22 introduce Defence Exhibit No. 1. And I know, Your

    23 Honours, that this is not being done to question the

    24 credibility of this witness, but just to contradict the

    25 validity of underlying data on which she is basing her

  114. 1 statements. This is the book by Samuel P. Huntington

    2 professor at Harvard University, that's dealing on

    3 page 283, he is dealing with this issue.

    4 JUDGE MAY: Have you got photocopies for us

    5 so we can look at it?

    6 MR. VUCICEVIC: I will make some photocopies,

    7 but I was thinking if you can put it on the overhead

    8 projector and say the sentences, Your Honour.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Well, we will need photocopies of

    10 it, but you can put it to the witness.

    11 A. Excuse me for turning my head.

    12 JUDGE MAY: What does it say?


    14 Q. If you could get a little bit clearer

    15 picture, just to the usher.

    16 A. I'm just pointing to it so that, perhaps,

    17 they can zoom in on it. I think this will do.

    18 JUDGE MAY: Yes, you've got it.

    19 A. Would you like me to read it?


    21 Q. If you could read the first two sentences on

    22 the full paragraph that is in the full view here,

    23 starting with --

    24 A. "Western support for Croatia also included

    25 overlooking the ethnic cleansing and the violation of

  115. 1 human rights and the laws of war for which the Serbs

    2 were regularly denounced. The West was silent when in

    3 1995, the revamped Croat army launched an attack on

    4 the Serbs of Krajina, who had been there for centuries,

    5 and drove hundreds of thousands of them into exile in

    6 Bosnia and Serbia."

    7 Q. That is enough. So it's reasonable to assume

    8 that your data that you looked at this problem and

    9 research that Professor Huntington has done are

    10 obviously differing. Because your conclusions and his

    11 conclusions are two different conclusions.

    12 A. I think I shall disagree with him in his

    13 first sentence. The second is after.

    14 Q. Dr. Greve, what I asked, I'm not questioning

    15 your opinion, nor putting his opinion against your

    16 opinion. What I'm asking is, is it reasonable for you

    17 to conclude that the data upon which he has relied on

    18 the same issue that you here testified about, it's

    19 different than yours?

    20 A. You asked me previously if I was aware of

    21 reports in the western press concerning Eastern

    22 Slavonia, to which I testified that I could not recall

    23 any in particular, but I was aware that, for instance,

    24 the High Commission for Refugees had drawn attention to

    25 this. And since I have not studied this, in

  116. 1 particular, I am unable -- I don't think I can be seen

    2 as an expert on what the western press or those who may

    3 be included in the sentence "Western support for

    4 Croatia," whether or not it was like this or that. I

    5 think it's beyond me to be able to make assessments on

    6 this, Your Honour.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: I will continue with the next

    8 line of questioning, Your Honour.

    9 Q. So it would be more reasonable -- it would be

    10 reasonable to conclude that Serbs in Prijedor were

    11 apprehensive of what the future might bring to them,

    12 and their conclusions about brotherhood are, indeed, a

    13 little bit more proper looked at in hindsight than

    14 yours, because ethnic cleansing happened in Krajina in

    15 a large scale, and western experts in western states

    16 didn't respond at all.

    17 A. The reference to Krajina and the Serbs of

    18 Krajina is dated 1995. That's three years -- it's

    19 August 1995, I tend to remember. That is three years

    20 after the events in Prijedor. Obviously what the

    21 people were feeling, I have made a general assessment,

    22 their feelings are the real thing.

    23 Q. I'm directing your attention now to the

    24 Prosecutor's Exhibit 29. That newspaper account when

    25 read in its totality indicates that there was some

  117. 1 criticism, public criticism, that was rendered against

    2 the police and chief of police at that time, Delic, was

    3 answering to the criticism. Isn't that your import of

    4 the article?

    5 A. That is absolutely so, and the criticism was

    6 that strongly against, essentially, all the authorities

    7 in Prijedor, that the High Commissioner’s Office for

    8 Refugees and ICRC were approached by people who wanted

    9 to leave the area.

    10 Q. And what he is doing, he's basically blaming

    11 the police in Prijedor were in control of many, many

    12 items of property that were stored at Keraterm, because

    13 within the context of this article, they are not

    14 talking about human beings in prison there. They are

    15 talking about property stored at that facility?

    16 A. That's correct.

    17 Q. And that property somehow disappeared?

    18 A. That is also correct. But it is stated

    19 explicitly that there is the cooperation between the

    20 police, the army and the authorities that still govern.

    21 Q. Is it unreasonable to assume that a country

    22 at war, there is going to be some degree of cooperation

    23 between military police and civilian authorities?

    24 A. I would assume that any country that is at

    25 war would try to unite forces.

  118. 1 Q. That's a reasonable assumption?

    2 A. It is.

    3 Q. To perform the functions that are actually

    4 overlapping to support the war effort?

    5 A. To work together to a lesser or larger

    6 degree, yes.

    7 Q. You mentioned in commenting on Exhibit 30

    8 some statements that at that time Colonel Radmilo

    9 Zeljaja remained. Do you know what was his rank at the

    10 time when the conflict in Prijedor erupted?

    11 A. I think he was the major. He was --

    12 Q. A major?

    13 A. A major, yes.

    14 Q. When you made some comments earlier when you

    15 testified about Jasenovac, you brought up the name of

    16 Mr. Kurt Waldheim?

    17 A. I did.

    18 Q. In your readings of the paper that were not

    19 available to the public, do you recall what was his

    20 rank at that time, Mr. Waldheim's?

    21 A. I don't recall his rank. I remember that he

    22 was described as the second in line in command within

    23 the intelligence unit in Banja Luka, and he was an

    24 Austrian, and he worked within the German/Austrian

    25 structure.

  119. 1 Q. So in that region, it seems that perhaps if

    2 he was a major at that time, it seems in that region,

    3 even not so high ranks of a major could command a great

    4 deal of military authority?

    5 JUDGE MAY: Well, I think we are straying

    6 from the point to be dealing with Colonel Waldheim.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: I will withdraw the

    8 question.

    9 Q. Zeljaja was an officer of the JNA; wasn't he?

    10 A. He was an officer of the JNA, and the JNA was

    11 transformed in 1992 to become the Bosnian Serb army.

    12 Q. And Major Zeljaja at that time was commander

    13 of 34 --

    14 A. The then 343rd --

    15 Q. Motorised Brigade?

    16 A. That's correct.

    17 Q. And this was stationed in Prijedor?

    18 A. That is correct.

    19 Q. And that brigade has been ordered into

    20 military action in Slavonia sometime in the summer

    21 of '91?

    22 A. They were mobilising for going to the

    23 Slavonian front, I think, in autumn 1991.

    24 Q. The military reservist who came in to bring

    25 his units to full strength, they came from the Prijedor

  120. 1 area, didn't they?

    2 A. That is my understanding, yes.

    3 Q. And almost all Serbs responded and most of

    4 the Muslims did not, to that call-up?

    5 A. That is correct. I also remember to have

    6 read that he was not able to fulfil his ranks

    7 completely, so they went to Croatia without having a

    8 complete setup.

    9 Q. So going into the battle, as a military

    10 officer of the legal independent state at that time, he

    11 is forced to go with 50 per cent ranks unfilled or,

    12 let's say, a certain per cent of ranks unfilled, and

    13 all those ranks unfilled are members of a certain

    14 ethnic group, Muslims. Would it be reasonable to

    15 assume that through the battles, whether they were for

    16 better or worse, for whatever position we can look, but

    17 the bonding between military commander and his soldiers

    18 is going to happen in the battle; is that likely? Is

    19 that a reasonable conclusion?

    20 A. I would think that his group, the people he

    21 commanded, and he himself had normal relations as for a

    22 commander and his people in a war field.

    23 Q. If most of the members, just by the fact that

    24 the Muslims didn't respond to the callup, most of the

    25 members of the 343rd Brigade were Serbs, that was not

  121. 1 an act of Major Zeljaja. That was just a fact of

    2 life.

    3 A. That was a fact of the current situation

    4 there and not his choice.

    5 Q. If a military commander is facing a situation

    6 where a certain ethnic group is not responding, do you

    7 think he can trust them later on?

    8 A. He may find that, perhaps, difficult. It

    9 depends on if he understands their reasons for not

    10 turning up.

    11 Q. I'm asking just is it reasonable to assume

    12 that a military man would do it. He's not a

    13 politician. He's a military man.

    14 A. I think the answer can be, since I'm not a

    15 military commander or a military person, I think it

    16 could be based on the general human ability to trust

    17 one another. Sometimes we understand why people will

    18 refuse to do something, and still we think we can trust

    19 them. On other occasions, we may find that very

    20 difficult on that very basis.

    21 Q. And he has proven himself to be, indeed, a

    22 very reasonable, tolerant man, just as you described;

    23 didn't he?

    24 A. He is the --

    25 Q. From this article?

  122. 1 A. Would you want me to --

    2 Q. Just in general from this article, without

    3 going into anything specific. If you can't recall, I

    4 will continue.

    5 A. This is an interview with him, yes.

    6 Q. Okay. On the page date stamped 49 on the

    7 bottom, I'm referring your attention to the sentence

    8 starting "They were also told." "They were also told

    9 (and I think that my statement was made public through

    10 our news media) that this Command would not allow

    11 Prijedor to be Tuzla (where Army soldiers had

    12 previously been killed in a column) or Sarajevo; as

    13 Arsic and I are not Kukanjac." Do you know anything

    14 about the modern historical concept of which you're an

    15 expert; do you know anything about that?

    16 A. Kukanjac.

    17 Q. Yes.

    18 A. I am not familiar with that.

    19 Q. Are you familiar with the -- if I tell you

    20 hypothetically that Kukanjac was a JNA General who

    21 ordered the pull out of his troops in the middle of May

    22 from Sarajevo and that more than 120 soldiers of his

    23 unarmed were killed by Muslims who ambushed him on one

    24 of Sarajevo's streets, where more than a dozen of

    25 medical personnel also were killed, would you consider

  123. 1 that as a violation of international humanitarian law?

    2 A. I understand your statement and if I can just

    3 build on the statement without making any judgment as

    4 to if it's a fair description, the way it's presented,

    5 it will sound as a breach of international law. But I

    6 don't think I should make judgments on these issues.

    7 Q. I was asking you because being an expert, and

    8 I'm not quite sure whether -- I believe it's proper in

    9 this court that an expert could be asked a

    10 hypothetical?

    11 JUDGE MAY: I think we're straying from the

    12 point again. Is there anything else on this document?

    13 MR. VUCICEVIC: Yes, I will ask direct

    14 questions now.

    15 Q. Dr. Greve, do you know anything about the

    16 attack of JNA in Sarajevo in mid May of 1992 when

    17 General Kukanjac, a commanding officer of the

    18 Yugoslav National Army was attacked and more than

    19 100 of his soldiers were slaughtered?

    20 A. I have read information about attacks. I

    21 have not paid that strong emphasis on this that I'm

    22 able to recollect in detail, but, yes, I have read

    23 information which was gathered by the Commission of

    24 Experts.

    25 Q. But you haven't read that report? You have

  124. 1 not read that report?

    2 A. Yes, I have read it, but I'm not able at this

    3 moment to --

    4 Q. To recall it?

    5 A. -- to recall it in detail.

    6 Q. Thank you. Are you also familiar, just a

    7 brief comment, are you familiar with the attack of the

    8 Muslim armed civilians on the JNA pull out from Tuzla,

    9 just two or three days later, still talking about mid

    10 May 1992?

    11 A. I'm familiar with fighting, yes.

    12 Q. And yet Major Zeljaja did not open-fire on

    13 the Muslim villages without any provocation, did he?

    14 A. I have not been able to establish that there

    15 were provocations that would justify that attack.

    16 Q. If I tell you that in Tadic's trial -- strike

    17 that. Are you familiar with the name Dr. Mirza

    18 Mujadzic?

    19 A. Yes.

    20 Q. Who is that gentleman?

    21 A. He was with the SDA, the Muslim party.

    22 Q. Do you think that he would, under oath, give

    23 the --

    24 JUDGE MAY: You can't ask the witness to

    25 comment on some evidence given by another witness,

  125. 1 Mr. Vucicevic.

    2 MR. VUCICEVIC: Okay.

    3 Q. I'm asking you based on this article here

    4 that was introduced, based on the statement by Major

    5 Zeljaja, that he said on May 22nd in the field below

    6 Hambarine, there was shooting at our soldiers.

    7 JUDGE MAY: Where is this in the document?

    8 MR. VUCICEVIC: That's on the page stamped on

    9 the bottom page 49, the long paragraph at the bottom,

    10 the second sentence from the top.

    11 Q. I will read it, if you don't mind: "On May

    12 22nd in the field below Hambarine, there was shooting

    13 at our soldiers or what was then the 5th Battalion and

    14 shot two of them dead but did not even allow an

    15 ambulance to come in, as there were three wounded

    16 soldiers." If we assume that to be true, that he

    17 believed this to be true, his response of his unit to

    18 fire back when the culprits for this were not turned

    19 over to the military, that would be considered a

    20 reprisal, a retaliation, wouldn't it?

    21 A. That word may be used, but it does not,

    22 thereby, state that this is within international law to

    23 retaliate in that manner. If I may say so, you asked

    24 me about Kozarac, as far as I remember, in your

    25 previous question --

  126. 1 Q. I was talking about this one --

    2 MR. VUCICEVIC: If we are going to have

    3 cross-examination, I would kindly ask the court if we

    4 can go one question at a time.

    5 JUDGE MAY: It's time for an adjournment.

    6 Are you going to finish these documents by the

    7 adjournment tonight?

    8 MR. VUCICEVIC: There's two or three that are

    9 very, indeed, important. They go to the crux of the

    10 issues here, and I doubt it, Your Honours.

    11 JUDGE MAY: Quarter of an hour.

    12 --- Recess taken at 3.32 p.m.

    13 --- On resuming at 3.55 p.m.


    15 Q. I am directing your attention to what's been

    16 marked as the Prosecutor Exhibit No. 32. The

    17 Prosecutor asked you to read the last sentence on this

    18 first page and that's page -- dated stamped 347.

    19 However, I am going to ask you to read the first

    20 sentence of that paragraph, so at least that we can

    21 complete that paragraph.

    22 A. It reads, "At dawn, on the 30th of May,

    23 'green berets' carried out an organised attack on

    24 Prijedor from several sides. After several hours of

    25 fighting, the attack was repulsed, the attackers routed

  127. 1 and partly destroyed. In these actions several

    2 soldiers of the Serb army and five policemen were

    3 killed."

    4 Q. Thank you. The rest you read yesterday.

    5 Could you explain who were green berets?

    6 A. Green berets is a reference to Muslims and

    7 those attacking may have been both Muslims and Croats.

    8 It's believed approximately 150 did attack this very

    9 morning.

    10 Q. 150 men --

    11 A. Yes.

    12 Q. -- attacked? Okay. And in your written

    13 statement, you use the word "small attack." In

    14 describing attacking, there was a small attack by 150

    15 men, armed men. Does it represent a small unit

    16 attacking a city on Sunday at dawn?

    17 A. It's a comparative use of the world small, as

    18 compared to the forces engaged in the other

    19 activities. Yes, it's small in comparison. But it's

    20 stated also the number.

    21 Q. But this small force of 150 resulted in a lot

    22 of casualties, a lot of people being killed; is that

    23 correct?

    24 A. I think the number as given by the Serbs in a

    25 different source is 12 killed. That's 12 too many.

  128. 1 Q. Yes, I certainly agree. But when

    2 overwhelming force was used in a political coup at the

    3 time, Prijedor, not even a single shot was fired. Is

    4 that correct?

    5 A. That is correct. The night of 30th of April,

    6 force was taken without a single shot -- power was

    7 taken without a single shot fired. But there

    8 were a number --

    9 Q. So this lead us, or lends, this statement

    10 lends itself to a reasonable conclusion that there were

    11 armed Muslims who were willing to carry on military

    12 activities against Serbian forces in the area?

    13 A. Following the events on 20th of May, which

    14 you alerted us to prior to the break, which resulted in

    15 an armed attack on Hambarine on the 23rd, which again

    16 was followed with the large scale attack on the Kozarac

    17 area, which was also before the 30th of May,

    18 yes. There were Muslims at this time and there may

    19 have been Croats among them. Or, numbers, I don't know

    20 Muslims/Croats, the proportions, who did gang up or

    21 gather on the west side of the River Sana in the Kozara

    22 forested area.

    23 Q. So where did the green beret Muslim forces

    24 come from, do you know that? From what area?

    25 A. They came, if I could have the local map, I

  129. 1 would be able to point it out. I was thinking of the

    2 geographical map and I can show it on the map for Your

    3 Honours. The big map, yes.

    4 JUDGE MAY: Exhibit 35.

    5 THE WITNESS: This area is the Hambarine

    6 area, which was attacked afternoon. That is, after

    7 twelve o'clock when those responsible for the shooting

    8 at --

    9 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please be

    10 asked to speak into the microphone? .

    11 JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. Dr. Greve, I know

    12 it's difficult because you're talking towards looking

    13 at the map.

    14 THE WITNESS: Forgive me.

    15 JUDGE MAY: But the interpreters ask that you

    16 could also speak towards the microphone. So if you

    17 could start that again, please.

    18 THE WITNESS: As we were speaking about

    19 previously today, there was a shooting incident on the

    20 22nd of May, 1992. It was a checkpoint on the way to

    21 Hambarine, where two people were killed immediately,

    22 two Serbs, one Muslim, at a checkpoint. All Muslims

    23 living in this area were --


    25 Q. If I just might ask for a quick correction,

  130. 1 might have just slipped your tongue. Is that one

    2 Muslim was wounded or killed? It came across that one

    3 Muslim was killed.

    4 A. One Muslim was wounded immediately and died

    5 from the wounds, to be precise. It was asked that

    6 those responsible at the checkpoint were handed over by

    7 the authorities in Hambarine, Hambarine being an

    8 administrative area. And there are a number of

    9 villages up here. It's next to a forested area further

    10 to the south. This being the River Sana, which flows

    11 south. When Hambarine was attacked, which is after

    12 noon, after twelve o'clock, on the 23rd, people are

    13 fleeing in several directions. Some are going in the

    14 direction of Rizvanovici, Rizvanovici, which is up here.

    15 Some are going to the Biscani area, which is even

    16 further up. And a number went to a forested area south

    17 of the road, which goes here. It goes from Prijedor

    18 and the whole way to Ljubija. A number went into the

    19 forested area here. After the shooting had ended, some

    20 went back, some remained in the forrest. Some of the

    21 forested areas were under, were hit by artillery shells

    22 as well. This was on the 23rd.

    23 On the 24th, there was the main attack which

    24 starts on the Kozara area, which I may follow the

    25 map differently, but that's further up in this

  131. 1 direction.

    2 Q. If I may remind you, were there any

    3 ultimatums that were delivered either to Muslim

    4 authorities in Hambarine or any ultimatums that were

    5 given to Muslim authorities in Kozarac?

    6 A. Yes, as mentioned, the ultimatum in Hambarine

    7 was to hand over, to my understanding, those who had

    8 manned the checkpoint and a policeman who lived in that

    9 area who had been -- it was so arranged that after the

    10 Serbs took power on the night of 30th of April, some

    11 from the police force were just asked to leave their

    12 jobs. Others were called forward and asked to abandon

    13 the authorities, their loyalty to the authorities in

    14 Sarajevo and pledge loyalty to the new Serbian rulers

    15 in Prijedor.

    16 One policeman, who had belonged to the

    17 general police force, was known in this job, he lived

    18 in this district, and allegedly from the sources we

    19 had, it was asked as an ultimatum on Radio Prijedor, on

    20 the 22nd, after the shooting the same day, that this

    21 policeman, who was allegedly not involved in the

    22 shooting, and the people who had manned the checkpoint,

    23 it was allegedly a checkpoint where normal officials

    24 were asking people who passed on the road not to pass

    25 with arms. The ultimatum would ask that all these

  132. 1 people were turned over to the authorities in Prijedor

    2 and that ultimatum was not met.

    3 Following that ultimatum not having been met,

    4 the Hambarine area, as such, a larger area that is, was

    5 shelled.

    6 Q. Let's just dwell on the point of the

    7 ultimatum and killings of two Serbian soldiers. So, at

    8 that time, there was already disrespect for the law in

    9 general in that area, a murderer could not be

    10 prosecuted for his act; is that correct? Whoever he

    11 might have been, either Serb, Croat or Muslim? So

    12 there was a complete paralysis of the legal system, in

    13 other words, there was a war.

    14 A. There was not a situation as you described

    15 it. There was a disagreement as to who opened fire at

    16 a checkpoint. As you will see from my report,

    17 information as to the fact that even over Radio

    18 Prijedor, it was stated that fire was opened by Serbs.

    19 There was a dispute concerning the facts and it seems

    20 that the authorities in Hambarine did not feel that

    21 they were in a position to hand over anyone at this

    22 time, even if they had possibly committed murder to

    23 those who had taken power in Prijedor on the night of

    24 the 30th of April.

    25 Q. Dr. Greve, I am glad you stated the point

  133. 1 that you made in your earlier report. But neither your

    2 report nor testimony that you have heretofore presented

    3 are being, it's being based on some facts uttered.

    4 Could you describe that checkpoint that you so

    5 eloquently testified about? What were the Serbs

    6 doing? I mean, how was it that Serbs, all of a sudden,

    7 found themselves at a Muslim checkpoint?

    8 A. That, if I may, will bring me back a little

    9 in time because as it was stated in one of the

    10 documents yesterday and that is confirmed in a

    11 newspaper article by one of the Serb military, the

    12 weaponry and equipment which used to belong to the TO,

    13 Territorial Defence units, was essentially taken care

    14 of by Serb authorities prior to them taking power.

    15 When there was a cease-fire in Croatia, troops from

    16 Croatia, that is, JNA forces that had been to the war,

    17 particularly the Vukovar battlefield in Croatia and

    18 Western Slavonia, marked the directed back to the

    19 former Yugoslavia or to, I should say, to either

    20 Bosnia-Herzegovina or Serbia through the area of

    21 Prijedor. At that time, the then elected authorities

    22 in Prijedor, there was one assembly, which we have

    23 referred to as for the general elections and its

    24 composition. There was also a local committee for

    25 national defence. And this --

  134. 1 Q. Dr. Greve, all I asked you was a simple

    2 question. Could you just describe the scene where the

    3 shooting happened. So that we can logically follow it

    4 from one to one. We can talk about, you know, how they

    5 were armed and who was armed, more or less, and just to

    6 see who happened to be on the checkpoint on the evening

    7 of 22nd in Hambarine, how did the shooting occur?

    8 A. I think the previous question you asked me

    9 was, how the Serbs could find themselves in this

    10 situation? And that is what I wanted to explain in

    11 some detail. But I shall appreciate that you want me

    12 to answer in brief. The brief answer is, there was a

    13 roadblock. This had been ordered by the local

    14 authorities in Prijedor that there would be local

    15 roadblocks everywhere. This had been arranged prior to

    16 the takeover of power.

    17 Subsequent to the Serbs taking power, not

    18 every roadblock was closed down immediately. The

    19 people, obviously, were not easy with the situation.

    20 They were appointed by, ultimately, the authorities

    21 based in Sarajevo. Now there were new people in charge

    22 in Prijedor, demand a roadblock, which they had been

    23 ordered to put up, according to instruction from their

    24 then authorities. So it was an ordinary roadblock with

    25 a few Muslims. There could have, I would not be able

  135. 1 to recount exactly if there were four who manned the

    2 roadblock, three, four or five is the number. And

    3 there were four or five Serbs coming in a car and they

    4 were, as far as I understand, military people and they

    5 were carrying arms. And they were asked to stop --

    6 this is the way we've been able to re-establish or to

    7 establish the facts in retrospect from the statements

    8 and from other open sources. And they asked that they

    9 stop and hand over their arms and there was a fire

    10 exchange between them.

    11 Q. In your description of the roadblock, you

    12 mentioned it was just an ordinary roadblock with a few

    13 Muslims. Were there any other roadblocks, that are not

    14 ordinary, that are heavily fortfied, or something like

    15 that, you know, could you explain? I don't mean to be

    16 disrespectful, but I can't help but note the

    17 qualification of a roadblock.

    18 A. I think there were many roadblocks prior to

    19 the Serbs taking power on the 30th of April, the night

    20 of the 30th of April and it had been a disputed issue

    21 in the local National Defence Council, for the reason

    22 that the non-Serbs did not want to redeploy soldiers

    23 who had come back from the battlefield in Croatia.

    24 They would want weapons to be laid down and they would

    25 not, at that time, as it has been reported, want

  136. 1 roadblocks.

    2 There are reports of two more roadblocks.

    3 The one in Hambarine. I am not suggesting there could

    4 not be any others. But in the open sources, there have

    5 been references, the Kozarski Vjesnik newspaper

    6 articles among them, there are references to three such

    7 roadblocks and these are also spoken about. The one in

    8 Hambarine I have, perhaps the most information about.

    9 There are two more.

    10 Q. Which are the two more? Could you enlighten

    11 the Court, please?

    12 A. If I may refold the map, I will take you to

    13 the area of Kozarac, and that is, one is in the Kozarac

    14 area, I think it's closer to the Kozarusa, but it's on

    15 this side. You have two roads, as you may see, that

    16 pass through Kozarac, and it is an old and a new road,

    17 but it runs between the two same cities. In west

    18 Prijedor, and further on to the east, it's not within

    19 the map, it will be Banja Luka.

    20 But there was a kind of checkpoint in the

    21 Kozarac main area, and there has been mention made of

    22 another roadblock. I assume that was a smaller

    23 roadblock in the Jakupovici area. As you may see, Your

    24 Honours, again, this is an intersection, and Jakupovici

    25 is both north and higher up. And it's south and

  137. 1 further down, down near Minning, lower, Gornji Minning,

    2 upper, so it is somewhere in this area at the

    3 intersection. There has been also reference made to a

    4 roadblock.

    5 But when it comes to the day since this --

    6 Q. If I may ask you a little bit more about the

    7 roadblocks, and then we will go back to the day. You

    8 mentioned that there was a checkpoint established

    9 before the power takeover in Prijedor; correct?

    10 A. Correct. Excuse me, not one, not "a," but

    11 some.

    12 Q. Some, including the three that you testified

    13 about?

    14 A. I'm not able to say that all of these --

    15 Q. I'll retract the question. Let's just say on

    16 some, okay? Those roadblocks were ordered by the then

    17 existing authorities, either of the Prijedor

    18 municipality or the state of Bosnia-Herzegovina; is

    19 that correct?

    20 A. They were ordered by the Prijedor

    21 municipality which was part of the state of

    22 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

    23 Q. Do you know who was the officer of the

    24 municipality of Prijedor that ordered those roadblocks?

    25 A. I believe it was General Arsic who was the

  138. 1 chief commander who was participating in the meeting in

    2 the national defence council, the local committee for

    3 national defence, which was a unit that existed in

    4 every opstina. And it was politicians normally who

    5 would participate in this defence council.

    6 There were several politicians, as named in

    7 my report as well, who participated in this local

    8 council. But there was a special situation when the

    9 issue of the roadblocks was debated in the defence

    10 council or committee. That is, the Muslims who were

    11 the majority did not want to have the roadblocks. They

    12 did not want to have soldiers returning from the

    13 battlefield, most of them being Serbs, redeployed in

    14 the area. But they were given what they understood as

    15 an ultimatum, told that at least if they wanted this,

    16 they could go on a guided tour, and some did, to one or

    17 two villages in Croatia, not so far away from Prijedor,

    18 but on the Croatian side of the border, which had been

    19 razed to the ground in military --

    20 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honours, if I may

    21 interrupt. This might be difficult to follow because

    22 Judge Greve, you know, has compiled all this

    23 information. If she can break it down into smaller

    24 segments, because I did do quite a bit of research on

    25 this matter too. And having been in Prijedor on

  139. 1 several occasions and walked all those grounds, I might

    2 be able to help you with questioning in smaller

    3 segments to see this. Because whatever the judge is

    4 saying, it's truthful information. However, we are

    5 missing certain bits and pieces of the narrative form.

    6 JUDGE MAY: I think I would be assisted if

    7 this matter could be dealt with more expeditiously. I

    8 must ask the witness if you would shorten your answers

    9 so that we can follow, and just deal, if you would,

    10 with the relevant questions about roadblocks.

    11 MR. VUCICEVIC: Absolutely, Your Honour.

    12 Q. You said that the Council for National

    13 Defence of the Prijedor municipality where Colonel Arsic

    14 participated issued an order for the roadblocks; is

    15 that correct?

    16 A. For redeployment and the erection of

    17 roadblocks, yes.

    18 Q. At that time, the presiding officer of the

    19 Municipal Council for Defence was Mohamed Cehajic;

    20 correct? He was a mayor.

    21 A. He was the mayor. If he was in the council

    22 for national defence, the committee, I don't know.

    23 Q. Or do you know, perhaps, Colonel Arsic was

    24 president of that council, was he?

    25 A. I'm not able to say that. I know he was in

  140. 1 this very discussion.

    2 Q. So from the sources that you have gathered,

    3 is the very import of having Colonel Arsic at that

    4 committee, that means those were his wishes that

    5 controlled the issuance of the order for the

    6 checkpoints? That's according to your sources.

    7 A. According to my sources, it was disputed

    8 between Serbs on the one side, those who had declared

    9 themselves as Serbs on the one side, and people who had

    10 not declared themselves as Serbs on the other side.

    11 Q. Judge, if I may direct your attention, those

    12 three villages that you just testified about, if you

    13 look back in your report, those are 95 per cent Muslim

    14 villages, and members of these checkpoints, as you

    15 testified, the Serbs were killed, the Muslims shot at

    16 them. You also testified -- let me just finish. You

    17 also testified that from this meeting, while Cehajic was

    18 the president, and Arsic was present at the meeting,

    19 the orders came. The only thing, if you know, who

    20 issued the order?

    21 A. The council issued the order. The people

    22 follow the order.

    23 Q. So that was a lawful government of the

    24 Bosnia-Herzegovina through its municipality or from

    25 above, issued the orders for checkpoints?

  141. 1 A. Correct.

    2 Q. And those checkpoints, even after the Serb

    3 power takeover in Prijedor, were still manned in three

    4 major Muslim areas; isn't that correct? You just

    5 testified to that.

    6 A. Yes, that is correct.

    7 Q. And even though on April 30th, the Serbs have

    8 taken a bloodless political coup, have replaced the

    9 officers of the municipality, but didn't go out there

    10 to attack Muslims of the checkpoints, which still were

    11 maintained by Muslims according to the order of the

    12 previous authority; isn't that correct?

    13 A. That is also correct. They took power in the

    14 town of Prijedor initially.

    15 Q. So as far as the most noxious things that the

    16 Serbs have done in the power takeover, they have played

    17 nationalistic songs, they have played the national flag

    18 on the municipal building, but they have not cleared

    19 the roads which were the obstacle for their free

    20 movement if they, indeed, have a power. So the power

    21 takeover was symbolic, wasn't it?

    22 A. No. May I fill you in on what else happened

    23 after they took power? It was explained as if I

    24 limited it to nationalistic songs and flags on the

    25 building. There was a huge gap, which I shall be

  142. 1 pleased, if Your Honours so wish, to explain in detail.

    2 JUDGE MAY: Dr. Greve, matters have been put

    3 to you, so you should be able to answer --

    4 A. Then I disagree. If the question is, whether

    5 nationalistic songs and flags only, no. They were much

    6 more than that.


    8 Q. Let's go back to the checkpoints and we're

    9 talking about Hambarine. So it was a military

    10 confrontation between the armed Muslim civilians or the

    11 members of the army of the Bosnia-Herzegovina? Do you

    12 know whether or not a government of Bosnia-Herzegovina

    13 in Sarajevo has called up their Territorial Defence

    14 shortly after their international recognition?

    15 A. This is a disputed issue. As you will see in

    16 my report, there is a faxsimile or a reprint of a

    17 telefax which was published by certain medias --

    18 Q. I know the item that you're referring to.

    19 You're referring to the order that was sent to the

    20 Ministry of police on April 29. I'm not referring to

    21 that one. I'm referring to the fact whether or not the

    22 Territorial Defence units, who were controlled under

    23 the state government, were called up to the active duty

    24 or by the authorities of the Bosnia-Herzegovina soon

    25 after the recognition of independence?

  143. 1 A. They were already working prior to that, yes,

    2 and they were inactive service continued to be.

    3 Q. Inactive service, because at that time there

    4 was a Yugoslav military; did Yugoslav military control

    5 the Territorial Defence or government independence, now

    6 state of Bosnia-Herzegovina? Who controlled the

    7 Territorial Defence units? Those are plain facts from

    8 this -- in these proceedings.

    9 A. The authorities in Bosnia-Herzegovina

    10 controlled the Territorial Defence as being local units

    11 within their country.

    12 Q. So when you indicated they were already

    13 working, what do you mean? So they were called up and

    14 in service?

    15 A. Yes.

    16 Q. And that's a result of them being in service

    17 called the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, that they

    18 remain in these checkpoints?

    19 A. To remain in place, yes. They had not

    20 received orders otherwise.

    21 Q. So with reference that we talked about

    22 before, fire being opened at the JNA members in

    23 Sarajevo with the great loss in life, with fire opened

    24 on pulling units from Tuzla, and again in Hambarine,

    25 military units of government of Bosnia-Herzegovina are

  144. 1 opening fire on the units of the Serbian army. That

    2 seems like a provocation, a reasonable conclusion. It

    3 might be, but a reasonable conclusion?

    4 A. That is your statement, yes.

    5 Q. If the fact that we had in a previous

    6 exhibit, that is, a statement by Major Zeljaja, that

    7 the units of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina did

    8 not allow access of the ambulance to take the wounded

    9 and sick to the hospital; that wouldn't be reasonable?

    10 JUDGE MAY: You know, all this is a matter of

    11 comment, really, comment which you can make in

    12 submissions to us. It's not assisting us to go into

    13 this sort of detail, Mr. Vucicevic. It's not assisting

    14 us when you're inviting the witness to make comments on

    15 this sort of matter. Can we move on to the next

    16 document, please?

    17 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, if I may

    18 explain.

    19 JUDGE MAY: No, would you move on, please?

    20 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, could I have a

    21 minute just to confer with my co-counsel in this,

    22 please?

    23 JUDGE MAY: Yes, you can.

    24 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you.

    25 JUDGE MAY: But I want you to move on.

  145. 1 MR. VUCICEVIC: Yes.

    2 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Vucicevic, my permission to

    3 have a conference with your co-counsel did not include

    4 permission to leave the court, which in some areas

    5 would be regarded as discourteous. If you want to

    6 confer, would you kindly do that in future.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, for

    8 this warning. This is not meant as a discourtesy, just

    9 a different understanding.

    10 Q. Dr. Greve, I'm directing your attention now

    11 to Prosecutor's Exhibit 33. I'd like you to

    12 concentrate and read the last paragraph on the page

    13 stamped page 284.

    14 A. Did you wish that I read it aloud?

    15 Q. Yes, please.

    16 A. "The cooperation between the civil

    17 authorities and the police station were satisfactory

    18 during the period of the seizure of authority.

    19 Everyone did his job. After the takeover of authority,

    20 however, the new people did not understand the real

    21 role of the police. The attempt to transform the

    22 police into a Council body which would execute orders

    23 given by the Council civil authorities was unacceptable

    24 and misunderstandings arose. A complete change of

    25 staff was demanded, and they were to be replaced by SDS

  146. 1 members, irrespective of education and expertise. I

    2 think it is best that I leave and the professionals

    3 remain untouched. They will always remain

    4 professionals in any system and still are even now that

    5 SDS is in power. If something was not done correctly,

    6 then I should be replaced and not they, because they

    7 executed my orders and those from the Chief of the

    8 Central Police Headquarters in Banja Luka and the

    9 Minister of Interior."

    10 Q. So in plain language, the article from the

    11 Kozarski Vjesnik which was introduced through your

    12 testimony indicates that at that time the living

    13 Mr. Drljaca pointed out that him and the minister of

    14 police were in charge of police in Prijedor, and he did

    15 not allow any of the politicians from the SDS to

    16 influence him or control him; isn't that correct?

    17 A. He is addressing the issue that the police

    18 are being criticised for some of their police

    19 activities, and, yes, he's answering in the police

    20 activities, yes, they are taking orders from him and

    21 from the central police headquarters in Banja Luka.

    22 Q. What he is saying, you are basically

    23 editorialising this statement, and I think the language

    24 is clear.

    25 A. Yes, it is.

  147. 1 Q. Thank you. At page 283, the late Mr. Drljaca

    2 was making a statement, as he called it, "6,000

    3 informative talks were held at the gathering centres of

    4 Omarska, Keraterm and Trnopolje"?

    5 A. That is correct.

    6 Q. As brutal as they might have been, they were

    7 still police investigations of some kind; is that

    8 correct?

    9 A. They were, in part, police investigations,

    10 yes.

    11 Q. And a lot of people survived these detention

    12 centres, gathering centres, if you will?

    13 A. There were absolutely -- his stating that "A

    14 group of 1,503 Muslims and Croats were taken to the

    15 camp of Manjaca."

    16 Q. But also there was a statement introduced

    17 that the International Red Cross evacuated some -- and

    18 I'm remembering only, 2,000 inmates from Trnopolje at

    19 the end of October, if I'm not mistaken; is that

    20 correct?

    21 A. That is correct, and the groups that had been

    22 taken to -- if I may say so, some people were taken

    23 straight from Omarska to Trnopolje. Some had been

    24 detained in Trnopolje all the time. And a few had come

    25 when released from Manjaca to Trnopolje. So it was

  148. 1 three different categories.

    2 Q. So people even from Manjaca were released and

    3 they were coming to Trnopolje?

    4 A. Not to stay in the camp, but on their way, so

    5 to speak.

    6 Q. So international humanitarian agencies were

    7 accepting the refugees from Trnopolje and taking them,

    8 being that it was closer to the northwestern route?

    9 A. That could have been the reason for it, yes,

    10 and sometimes maybe they just --

    11 Q. So there were some prisoners that were taken

    12 from Omarska to Trnopolje, some that were taken to

    13 Manjaca, some prisoners were taken from Manjaca to

    14 Trnopolje; all of these are correct?

    15 A. I believe that if they stayed for any period

    16 of time on their way from Manjaca, they were mainly

    17 taken to Karlovac. I won't be able to say, but they

    18 were sort of --

    19 Q. So we cannot take as the simple arithmetic

    20 statement that 6,000 informative talks were held and

    21 only 1,503 were transferred to Manjaca. So this does

    22 not add that up, that approximately four and a half

    23 thousand people were killed; this is not the

    24 mathematics intended?

    25 A. No, and I think this is elaborated on in my

  149. 1 report where I've tried to recollect the numbers taken

    2 straight from Omarska to Trnopolje. And the majority

    3 were moved from Omarska on the 5th and 6th of August; a

    4 limited few, perhaps 100, 150, were taken only on the

    5 22nd, 23rd of August, and also then to Trnopolje. So

    6 you are right.

    7 Q. Directing your attention to Prosecutor's

    8 Exhibit 34, you quoted only one sentence from this,

    9 maybe, perhaps, two. You read in the third paragraph

    10 from the top on the first page, and I'm asking you to

    11 read the whole paragraph out loud.

    12 A. The first paragraph on the first page?

    13 Q. The third paragraph on that page.

    14 A. Excuse me, I will read it: "Two years ago,

    15 the Serb people sensed instinctively that once again

    16 they were faced with the danger from the same villains

    17 who in 1941 started the extermination process of the

    18 Serbian people and therefore formed their own party.

    19 On 2nd August 1991, we in the District of Prijedor have

    20 formed the SDS" --

    21 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please

    22 slow down for the benefit of the interpreters.

    23 A. "... said Miskovic. Prior to that we tried

    24 hard to reach an agreement with the Muslim and Croatian

    25 party" --

  150. 1 JUDGE MAY: I'm sorry. Could you slow down,

    2 please? The interpreters are complaining.

    3 A. Excuse me, Your Honour.


    5 Q. Okay, that would be enough. How would you

    6 understand this statement when Mr. Miskovic says

    7 "Serb people sensed instinctively"? Would you

    8 consider him to report based on what he heard from the

    9 people, from his own, or him making a political

    10 statement a year after the camps had been formed?

    11 A. This is --

    12 Q. By that time, the inmates of the detention

    13 centres had all been transferred. This was, time-wise,

    14 really unconnected. Would you see this to be a

    15 self-serving statement or he has objectively stated

    16 what he felt at the time?

    17 A. He is stating what he finds reasonable to

    18 state, and he is using the words "sense instinctively."

    19 Q. He is telling his feelings of what he -- he

    20 is expressing his views that he has correlated through

    21 being the people's representative?

    22 A. That could well be the case, yes.

    23 Q. Thank you. We are now on Exhibit 36 which

    24 deals with the international evacuation. You have

    25 testified on Prosecution Exhibit 39 that ICRC report

  151. 1 dated October 3rd, 1992. Is there anything in this

    2 record that indicates that the Serbians are

    3 perpetrators of ethnic cleansing which you elaborated

    4 in the second paragraph from the bottom on the second

    5 page of the report?

    6 A. Excuse me, the --

    7 Q. The page that was stamped 987, right bottom

    8 corner.

    9 A. Oh, I was just given another one. I was

    10 looking at the wrong one. Excuse me.

    11 JUDGE MAY: Have you got Exhibit 39?

    12 A. I have just received it. Thank you, Your

    13 Honour. And it's page 937?


    15 Q. Yes.

    16 A. In the second last paragraph, the ICRC is

    17 making a general comment on how they conceive that

    18 under cover of a policy of ethnic cleansing, tens of

    19 thousands of members of minority groups, examples are

    20 not given, in areas controlled by "the parties," in the

    21 plural, examples not given, were still at the mercy of

    22 the repressive measures applied locally in accordance

    23 with a discriminatory ideology.

    24 Q. So this report, on its face, is neutral. It

    25 doesn't blame Muslims, Serbs, or Croats; it just says

  152. 1 these events are happening. Correct?

    2 A. ICRC is reporting it this way, and what I

    3 testified to yesterday was that, as for the area of

    4 Prijedor, this is in harmony with how I have described

    5 the changes in Prijedor.

    6 Q. There was another International Committee of

    7 the Red Cross report which I would like to call your

    8 attention to. That's the report of International

    9 Committee of the Red Cross issued by Cornelis Sommaruga

    10 on July 29, 1993, and this one --

    11 JUDGE MAY: Exhibit 12.

    12 MR. VUCICEVIC: Exhibit 12.

    13 I have looked over this end for on the second page and

    14 page numbering is on the top of the page, the fourth

    15 paragraph from the top, starting with, "Behind this

    16 nightmare situation."

    17 THE WITNESS: I have found the paragraph,

    18 yes.


    20 Q. And there is a term "ethnic cleansing"

    21 further down the paragraph?

    22 A. Correct.

    23 Q. At that time, did the world know about the

    24 detention centres in Prijedor? This was July 2, 1992.

    25 A. To my knowledge, there were representatives

  153. 1 of the international community that were aware of it.

    2 But the public, as such, were not made aware of it

    3 before on the 2nd August, when the newspaper article

    4 appeared in an American newspaper.

    5 Q. Have you read any reports by the

    6 International Red Cross, any statements from the

    7 persons who had firsthand knowledge about it?

    8 A. No, I have not read statements as ICRC as a

    9 matter of policy would not make such reports

    10 available. The ICRC will give press releases and

    11 public statements, but they will not give any outsider

    12 access to any of their files. It's a matter of their

    13 basic policy. They think that they cannot do their

    14 work if they start sharing information.

    15 Q. But, yet, if the evaluation -- the violations

    16 of international criminal law by are against Kalor

    17 being committed by being silent, it really

    18 doesn't help anybody, at least the victim. So if I

    19 would assume that a responsible international officer

    20 of any organisation being faced with the atrocities of

    21 a grand scale as they are alleged that have happened in

    22 Prijedor, would react if they had known, just as the

    23 reporters reacted once they heard about it. But, yet,

    24 this is a neutral on its face. It does not indicate,

    25 it doesn't indicate where it's committed by any of the

  154. 1 groups, ethnic groups in Bosnia. However -- yes, is it

    2 neutral?

    3 JUDGE MAY: I think all this is a comment.

    4 MR. VUCICEVIC: I'll take that question

    5 back.

    6 JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to move on.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: The report on page 3, it's

    8 commenting that in Sarajevo, ICRC relief convoy came

    9 under deliberate attack. And Frederick Marice

    10 died of the injuries that resulted in suspension of

    11 ICRC relief efforts. Do you know anything of the

    12 circumstances how Mr. Marice was attacked and was

    13 injured?

    14 A. No, I have read this, yes, and his name has

    15 just been made familiar to me. I have no further

    16 information. I may, however, add I think it's useful

    17 that the fact that the ICRC may not go public on every

    18 piece of information they have, may decide not to go

    19 public, does not mean that they do not work on

    20 something or react on something. ICRC have constant

    21 continuing contact with all parties in armed conflict.

    22 And I am perfectly sure they were asking access to each

    23 and every camp they knew of prior to any information

    24 coming out to the outside world.

    25 Q. Within the context of the civil war, a relief

  155. 1 agency worker or officer is being killed right in the

    2 beginning of the war. Wouldn't it be appropriate, at

    3 least for the Commission of Experts to look who have

    4 committed this act?

    5 A. I think that every person who was killed in

    6 the conflict in the former Yugoslavia deserved that the

    7 Commission of Experts to the extent possible should look

    8 at the situation. I think when it comes to the

    9 International Red Cross, that was an entity, an agency,

    10 international agency, present and able itself to handle

    11 this specific case. And as long as they did not

    12 explicitly ask us to assist them on that, I am not

    13 aware that that was given priority. But, yes, every

    14 life and every life was one to much lost in

    15 Bosnia-Herzegovina deserved attention.

    16 Q. The reason I am inquiring into this, Judge

    17 Greve, is civil war is like a brush fire, the very

    18 first few shots are important and then later on nobody

    19 could even count who is shooting and sometimes very

    20 difficult for you to find who are the people that

    21 perished. But, yet, is that correct?

    22 A. That may be correct. I don't think that it

    23 can be made as such a general statement. It may vary.

    24 Q. So if a member of the first member of

    25 international organisation is being killed in a civil

  156. 1 war, it is indeed very important to find who did it and

    2 assign the blame. And I was just asking you whether

    3 you ever expressed interest to find it?

    4 A. I worked wholeheartedly and devoted all my

    5 available time to look into the aspects I could of the

    6 conflict in the former Yugoslavia as long as I worked

    7 with the Commission. But I did try to focus primarily

    8 on the events in Prijedor to have some general

    9 understanding of the overall situation.

    10 Q. I have another question or two to Dr. Greve.

    11 In your statement on page, base page 626, and that's

    12 Prosecutor's Exhibit No. 10, paragraph 56. And also in

    13 the Tadic's testimony on page 765, you have elaborately

    14 testified about historical events that impacted the

    15 Serbs in the Prijedor area. There you are

    16 discussing --

    17 A. Excuse me, I was only now given the papers.

    18 Q. I am very sorry, I apologise. And I will

    19 direct your attention again.

    20 A. Thank you.

    21 Q. That is page 17 on the top of Exhibit 10.

    22 That is your report. And you have paragraph 56. And

    23 you have page 765 in the Tadic's transcript, which

    24 is --

    25 JUDGE MAY: Where is the 765 number, Mr.

  157. 1 Vucicevic, in the transcript?

    2 MR. VUCICEVIC: 765 on Tadic's transcript.

    3 JUDGE MAY: Yes, where is that? Wait a

    4 minute, I have it.

    5 MR. VUCICEVIC: Starting from the line 1.

    6 JUDGE MAY: Yes, I have it.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: And going for the next two

    8 pages -- three pages as a matter of fact.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Yes.


    11 Q. You don't have to read it, Judge Greve, if

    12 you remember the content. I'll ask you some general

    13 question because here I have some question concerning

    14 the underlying data on which you made those statements

    15 and those are fair, subject to, I believe, Your Honour,

    16 fair subject to our examination.

    17 Where did you get the information for those

    18 statements?

    19 A. For my statements on Prijedor as such and

    20 limited to Prijedor and informations in Prijedor, I

    21 had --

    22 Q. What I am referring here specifically, you

    23 are talking about Chetniks, you are talking about

    24 Dragisa Vasic you are talking about Moljevic, you are

    25 talking about Drazen Mihajlovic and those are all names

  158. 1 on the paragraph 57.

    2 A. The quote in paragraph 57 is taken from the

    3 book of Noel Malcolm, who wrote, "Bosnia: A Short

    4 History." And that's a direct quote from him.

    5 Q. Is Mr. Malcolm the only source that you got

    6 information on all of these historical figures?

    7 A. No, but the, the specific quote which is in

    8 paragraph 57 is from that source. I have read general

    9 books about World War II. I have not made in depth

    10 studies of World War II. It occurred to me as

    11 confusing at one point that I got two very different

    12 opinions about the meaning of the word "Chetnik". Some

    13 thought it was honourable, good, signified something

    14 dignified. And others had the opposite point of view.

    15 So I thought I should try to understand why it was that

    16 so different approaches would be linked to the word

    17 "Chetnik".

    18 Q. Okay. So you have resolved those questions

    19 that you had in your mind about this issue?

    20 A. We resolved this, perhaps is not a good

    21 word. But I have had some broad understanding to come

    22 to appreciate there are good reasons for having good

    23 feelings, honourable remarks linked to some of the

    24 Chetnik movements. And I have come to understand that

    25 some other Chetnik movements have not given reason to

  159. 1 respect. And I have come to know that a number have

    2 been disputed. And I believe the role of Drazen

    3 Mihajlovic, General Drazen Mihajlovic is disputed. I

    4 know that in Jajce in 1943 the parties have decided to

    5 break away from him. Churchhill did the same quite

    6 later, so that the Americans, and he was executed after

    7 World War II, for his work during World War II, but it

    8 was disputed.

    9 Q. Was there a trial of General Mihajlovic?

    10 A. If it was a court marshal, I shall not say, I

    11 know that he was taken and it was definitely disputed.

    12 Q. Your Honour, I am presenting the Defence

    13 Exhibit 2 and 3 that are going to controvert the

    14 underlying facts about which the witness has testified

    15 now.

    16 JUDGE MAY: Is this about events fifteen and

    17 more years ago?

    18 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, they are going

    19 about the facts that she has just testified. And if

    20 the witness had introduced the facts in three pages of

    21 her, Tadic's testimony, which are part, which are now

    22 part of the evidence in this court, and the witness has

    23 in her statement has introduced a page of her statement

    24 and report, we are going to rebut the underlying

    25 statements upon which the opinion of this witness is

  160. 1 being rendered.

    2 JUDGE MAY: How is this going to assist us,

    3 Mr. Vucicevic? It may be that the witness has made

    4 these comments, but what assistance is it to us dealing

    5 with events in the early 1990s to know about events in

    6 the 1940s? How is it relevant to your case?

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour --

    8 JUDGE MAY: How are you going to connect it

    9 up? What's the point?

    10 MR. VUCICEVIC: That goes as my assistant

    11 just, Judge, Vann has suggested it goes to the

    12 credibility of the Prosecutor case. They injected this

    13 testimony on this case. They have brought it in.

    14 They have testified about the role of Chetniks in

    15 extermination by Jasenovac. They were talking about

    16 the Serbs being involved with it. They are painting

    17 a war with a broad brush to make it even and that's

    18 basically what we are challenging. We are challenging

    19 the underlying premise, Your Honour.

    20 JUDGE MAY: I am not going to stop you

    21 putting this evidence in because it's quite right that

    22 the Prosecution, as it were, started it by introducing

    23 this sort of evidence. Therefore, it's only fair that

    24 you have the opportunity to deal with it. But I must

    25 tell you that as far as the Trial Chamber is concerned,

  161. 1 we are anxious to preserve the rules of relevance and

    2 we shall apply them ourselves.

    3 Now, if you would like as rapidly as possible

    4 to deal with this, we shall not be paying a great

    5 attention, as I said, to this sort of evidence as

    6 produced by the Prosecution.

    7 MR. VUCICEVIC: This is Exhibit 2 and this is

    8 Exhibit 3.

    9 Q. Dr. Greve, this is a reprint from Time

    10 magazine, are you familiar with this magazine?

    11 A. In general, yes.

    12 Q. Yes. And I am directing your attention to

    13 the date of publication of this magazine. May 25,

    14 1942.

    15 JUDGE MAY: Just one moment.

    16 MR. VUCICEVIC: Yes, Your Honour.

    17 JUDGE MAY: Yes, if you'd like to go on.


    19 Q. And if you read it, I am going to ask you the

    20 question.

    21 A. Excuse me, I did not read it just like that.

    22 But if you want me to do that before you ask me

    23 questions?

    24 Q. I will direct you to -- will you just read on

    25 the page 23, the last paragraph there.

  162. 1 A. The last paragraph --

    2 Q. The Nazi press. Next to this long map.

    3 A. The paragraph reads, "The Nazi press has

    4 revealed Mihajlovic's army as rebels, Jews and

    5 communists. Unquestionably, they are rebels.

    6 Unquestionably, some are Jews, some are Marxist,

    7 communists of one shade or another. Many more are

    8 probably are Balkan and communists which usually means

    9 Partisans of the country as against -- of the country

    10 as against the city. The farmer as against the

    11 businessman. These people in general have, Slavic,

    12 pro-Russian terrorist or Stalinist leanings. The

    13 United Nations press has often referred to Mihajlovic's

    14 forces as Chetniks. The name of a Serb patriotic

    15 body, which long fought humanists within the wars

    16 against Serbia's suppressors. Many are Chetniks or

    17 their descendants, but Mihajlovic's army is best

    18 described as the patriotic Balkan force with a majority

    19 of Serbs built around a large nucleus of trained

    20 Yugoslav troops."

    21 Q. That will be enough. So if we are going to

    22 take into consideration articles in the press or the

    23 comments by the historians subsequently who were not

    24 witnessing the current events, it seems we can place at

    25 least the same, if not undoubtedly, much more reliability

  163. 1 on the article published in the Time magazine at the

    2 time, at the height of the war. And Mihajlovic and his

    3 forces, Chetniks, were considered allies, fighters

    4 against Nazis by the Nazi press and by allied press.

    5 Is that fair to conclude from this article?

    6 A. In 1942, that is correct.

    7 Q. Yes. And then, now, I would like before I go

    8 here, I would like to ask you why was General

    9 Mihajlovic executed and who executed him? Which

    10 government and for what?

    11 A. I am not able to tell you the precise

    12 whereabouts. It is my understanding that those who

    13 came to power after the war had ended quickly executed

    14 him.

    15 Q. Okay. If I were to remind you that he was

    16 executed as collaborator with the Nazis, would it jog

    17 your memory?

    18 A. Yes.

    19 Q. So he was executed as a collaborator as the

    20 Nazis, would you agree with me?

    21 A. Yes.

    22 Q. I would like you now to take a look at the

    23 Defence Exhibit No. 3, entitled, "Truman's Statement."

    24 And you can read the whole article for yourself. When

    25 you get to the Backstein (phoen) statement, I would

  164. 1 appreciate it if you can read it out loud.

    2 A. I'll read this as a statement which is giving

    3 an honour to Drazen Mihajlovic, posthumous honour to him,

    4 expressed by a group of Balkan aviators whom he had

    5 rescued during the war. And in 1946 decided his

    6 disrecognition of his services to the allied course.

    7 Q. And title of the article is?

    8 A. The award Truman statement, the award of the

    9 Legion of Merit to General Dragn Jub Mihajlovic.

    10 Q. And I hope that my learned counsel on the

    11 other side, being very much familiar with the military

    12 decorations will stipulate that this is the highest

    13 American decoration that could be given to a foreign

    14 officer, isn't that correct?

    15 MS. HOLLIS: I would have to do research on

    16 that, I am afraid.

    17 MR. VUCICEVIC: How about a hypothetical?

    18 Q. Judge Greve, will you please read the

    19 statement, basically a statement for which General

    20 Mihajlovic has received the highest United States

    21 military decoration?

    22 A. The citation accompanying the award signed by

    23 President Truman reads as follows: "General Dragoljub

    24 Mihajlovic distinguished himself in an outstanding

    25 manner as Commander in Chief of the Yugoslav Army

  165. 1 Forces and later as Minister of War by organising and

    2 leading important resistance forces against the enemy

    3 which occupied Yugoslavia from December 1941 to

    4 December 1944. Through the undaunted efforts of his

    5 troops, many United States airmen were rescued and

    6 returned safely to friendly control. General

    7 Mihajlovic and his forces, although lacking adequate

    8 supplies and fighting under extreme hardships,

    9 contributed materially to the allied course and were

    10 instrumental in obtaining a final allied victory."

    11 Q. Thank you. The date of this decoration was

    12 March 29, 1948; that's correct?

    13 A. That's correct.

    14 Q. Thank you, Judge Greve. I have no more

    15 questions.

    16 JUDGE MAY: Do you have any re-examination,

    17 Ms. Hollis, because I'm looking at the clock, and it's

    18 about time that we adjourn. But, no doubt, if you had

    19 a few minutes of re-examination, we could deal with it,

    20 otherwise we must sit again tomorrow.

    21 MS. HOLLIS: I do have a few questions, Your

    22 Honour, but very few.

    23 JUDGE MAY: Very well, if we can deal with it

    24 in five minutes, please.

    25 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour.

  166. 1 Re-examined by Ms. Hollis:

    2 Q. If we could ask that Prosecution Exhibit 34

    3 be supplied again to the witness, that is an article of

    4 the third anniversary of the Serbian Democratic Party?

    5 A. I have that.

    6 Q. Defence counsel directed your attention to

    7 the third paragraph beginning, "Two years ago the

    8 Serbian people sensed instinctively," and it goes on

    9 from there. In that connection, Defence counsel asked

    10 you about the existence of camps. Now, if you would

    11 look at the date of that article, please, what is the

    12 date of the article?

    13 A. It's 1993.

    14 Q. And that is August of 1993?

    15 A. That is correct.

    16 Q. So two years prior would have been August of

    17 1991?

    18 A. That is correct.

    19 Q. Had the Serbs taken over power in Prijedor at

    20 that time?

    21 A. No, they had not.

    22 Q. Had there been any of the incidents referred

    23 to at Hambarine, any of the checkpoints you discussed

    24 established at that point?

    25 A. There had not. But if I may, I wonder if

  167. 1 there is not some kind of a mistake written in this,

    2 because it's on the occasion of the third anniversary,

    3 and it's 1993. Then it's referring to the 2nd of

    4 August, 1991 when they had already participated in

    5 elections. So I assume it's mistaken for 1990.

    6 Q. So in 1990 instead of 1991?

    7 A. I think that is correct, since it's referring

    8 to the third anniversary, and they did participate in

    9 the election in 1990.

    10 Q. So almost three years before the takeover of

    11 Prijedor and the subsequent events; is that your

    12 understanding?

    13 MR. VUCICEVIC: Objection, Your Honour. Even

    14 if that version is correct, it only says "Two years

    15 ago."

    16 JUDGE MAY: Yes, I agree.

    17 MS. HOLLIS:

    18 Q. If I could ask you to look at Prosecution

    19 Exhibit 30, please? When Defence counsel was

    20 questioning you about this article with now Colonel

    21 Radmilo Zeljaja, he asked you if Colonel Zeljaja had

    22 been the commander of the 343rd Motorised Brigade; do

    23 you recall that question?

    24 A. I do.

    25 Q. Would you please look at the third page of

  168. 1 the article, and you see the caption "General Talic's

    2 wisdom"?

    3 A. I do.

    4 Q. Would you look at the paragraph above that,

    5 and if you look at the second line beginning with the

    6 words "Especially Colonel Arsic"?

    7 A. Paragraph?

    8 Q. Above "General Talic's wisdom" beginning with

    9 "I repeat"?

    10 A. Yes.

    11 Q. If you look at the second line of that

    12 paragraph beginning with the language "Especially

    13 Colonel Arsic"?

    14 A. Yes.

    15 Q. And what follows as to what Colonel Arsic's

    16 position was?

    17 A. "At that time he was the Commander of the

    18 brigade and I was the Chief of Staff."

    19 Q. So that we can be clear on it, at several

    20 times, Defence counsel asked you whether you had talked

    21 with Serbs in Republika Srpska or in the Prijedor area

    22 when you were in the course of writing your report and

    23 doing your analysis. You had indicated that you were

    24 denied access to the area. Were you allowed to receive

    25 any documents or have any interviews set up with Serbs

  169. 1 in that area?

    2 A. I did not specifically ask for a special

    3 structure to make interviews in Prijedor. I asked to

    4 be able to go there. I sought people from that area

    5 with whom I could speak, but that was not possible.

    6 That is to say, there are some mixed families with

    7 people, people who have been married or are married to

    8 Serbs and have left the area.

    9 Q. So that you made unsuccessful efforts to

    10 obtain that type of information?

    11 A. Yes.

    12 Q. Concerning Mr. Raskovic, the Krajina SDS

    13 leader, Defence counsel asked you what you had knew

    14 about him, and you indicated you had done some reading

    15 in articles about him. Based on your reading, were you

    16 able to learn anything about the type of views that he

    17 espoused?

    18 A. He espoused, to use the word of the Defence

    19 counsel, some of the biased nationalistic language.

    20 Q. What do you mean by that?

    21 A. I would say that he was using to divide

    22 between two different kinds of nationalistic views --

    23 MR. VUCICEVIC: Your Honour, I'm misquoted

    24 here. I was trying to basically, at that time, have

    25 the witness agree whether there was good nationalism

  170. 1 and bad nationalism, but that line of questioning was

    2 abandoned. We really have not qualified through this

    3 witness at all Mr. Raskovic, whom I know very well.

    4 MS. HOLLIS: It's my recollection that, in

    5 fact, Defence counsel did ask what she knew about him

    6 or had read about him. I'm simply following up on

    7 that. I will continue, Your Honour.

    8 Your Honour, at the break I asked that

    9 several pages of Defence Exhibit 1 be reproduced. Was

    10 that done? Thank you. If that book could be returned

    11 to the Defence, please, with my thanks for allowing me

    12 to review it.

    13 Q. Dr. Greve, Defence counsel showed you Defence

    14 Exhibit 1 and asked you to read from a certain page,

    15 and that was page 283, where they were discussing the

    16 author's view about Western support for Croatia; do you

    17 recall that?

    18 A. I recall that. I was asked to read that,

    19 yes.

    20 Q. Defence counsel also posed to you several

    21 questions asking you whether certain events might lead

    22 the Prijedor Serbs to be apprehensive or worried about

    23 what would happen to them in the future?

    24 A. I recall that.

    25 Q. That was in the context of actions they may

  171. 1 have taken during the time period of your analysis?

    2 A. I recall that.

    3 Q. If I could at this time, I would ask that

    4 Defence Exhibit 1 for identification be provided to the

    5 witness?

    6 MR. VUCICEVIC: The book?

    7 MS. HOLLIS: Please.

    8 Q. I would ask that you please turn to page 281

    9 of that book. On that page, if you would go

    10 approximately one-third of the way down that book where

    11 you see the line beginning "Croatia, the Croatian

    12 government and Croats"; do you see that line?

    13 A. I do.

    14 Q. Would you please go down and begin with the

    15 end of that line, the word "and," read down to the next

    16 line, and see "At the secondary level"; do you see that

    17 language?

    18 A. "And in Bosnia-Herzegovina"?

    19 Q. Just to yourself read to the end of that

    20 statement, it goes down to the next line, and then on

    21 the next line there is a sentence beginning, "At the

    22 secondary level"; do you see that?

    23 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, if I would be

    24 allowed to assist the witness, I could highlight it --

    25 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

  172. 1 MS. HOLLIS: -- and then the Defence could be

    2 provided back their copy.

    3 Q. If you would please look at the highlighted

    4 portion there, could you please read that highlighted

    5 portion?

    6 A. "At the secondary level, the Serbian

    7 government promoted a greater Serbia by helping Bosnian

    8 and Croatian Serbs and the Croatian government aspire

    9 to greater Croatia and supported the Bosnian Croats."

    10 Q. Thank you. During the Defence

    11 cross-examination, you were asked about various sources

    12 and whether you considered them reliable or not

    13 reliable. I would ask you, in the analysis and report

    14 that you did, were you trying to determine reliability

    15 or overall consistency or inconsistency?

    16 A. I was trying to determine overall

    17 consistency.

    18 MS. HOLLIS: No further questions, Your

    19 Honour. Thank you.

    20 JUDGE MAY: Is there any objection to the

    21 witness being released?

    22 MR. VUCICEVIC: No, Your Honour.

    23 JUDGE MAY: I take it not. In fact,

    24 throughout this trial, we have assumed that the

    25 witnesses can be releaseed, unless there's objection

  173. 1 from either side.

    2 Judge Greve, thank you for coming, indeed.

    3 You are released.

    4 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.

    5 JUDGE MAY: We will adjourn now until

    6 tomorrow morning.

    7 --- Whereupon hearing adjourned at

    8 5.27 p.m. to be reconvened on Wednesday,

    9 the 8th day of July, 1998 at 9.30 a.m.