Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 2206

 1                           Wednesday, 24 September 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           [The witness takes the stand]

 6                           --- Upon commencing at 8.51 a.m.

 7                           WITNESS:  EWA TABEAU [Recalled]

 8             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Let the witness make the declaration.  You've

 9     already made the declaration.  Well, then you remain subject to it.

10             Mr. Alarid.

11             MR. ALARID:  I think it is my turn.

12             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Your turn.

13             MR. ALARID:  Thank you.

14                           Cross-examination by Mr. Alarid:

15        Q.   Good morning, Dr. Tabeau.  How are you?

16        A.   Good morning.  Very well, thank you.

17        Q.   My name is Jason Alarid and I represent Milan Lukic.  I just want

18     to ask a few questions.  I don't think this will take too long.

19             With regards to your analysis just to kind of have a rehash as

20     we're coming back a couple days later, the first set of data you used was

21     of course the 1991 census?

22        A.   That's correct.

23        Q.   And the second set of data you used was voter registration?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Now, had you done any long-standing demographic model that would

Page 2207

 1     take into consideration earlier censuses, quite possibly?

 2        A.   Not for this study but there is a table in the report in which I

 3     give numbers of the population in Visegrad since the 1948 census.

 4        Q.   And is that broken down by ethnicity?

 5        A.   No, it isn't.  These are overall totals.

 6        Q.   Okay.  What was the population growth over the model period?

 7        A.   The population growth in terms of how much population increase?

 8        Q.   Yeah.  I mean, were you able to --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please observe a pause.

10     Thank you.

11             MR. ALARID:

12        Q.   Birth rates, things like that.

13        A.   I didn't study the population growth.

14        Q.   And I'm sorry, I need to turn on my microphone.  Or my ear piece,

15     rather.

16             And so you couldn't tell just from looking at the data what was

17     just people having children, of course, within the community versus

18     people actually emigrating or moving and populating the area?

19        A.   Well, this is not what we did in this study.  We didn't study

20     demographic trends, in fertility, in mortality, in migration.  We

21     observed the population of Visegrad on two moments of time, at the

22     outbreak of the conflict 1991 census data and post-conflict population in

23     the voters registration.

24        Q.   And in the post-conflict information, were there any other data

25     sets other than voter registration to compare against?

Page 2208

 1        A.   No, except there was a small data set from the UNHCR that we used

 2     to -- for contextual purposes, and this data was on internally displaced

 3     persons.

 4        Q.   And you didn't -- you didn't necessarily do any verification work

 5     for the Red Cross list, did you?

 6        A.   Well, we have done a lot of work on the Red Cross data, but tell

 7     me exactly what you mean with the verification.

 8        Q.   Meaning just investigative work to make sure that there's not any

 9     errors in the list that may have slipped through the cracks from the Red

10     Cross perspective.

11        A.   Well, this is what we've been always doing with every source and

12     we checked the ICRC data for deficiencies, for incompleteness, for

13     misreporting, but at the same time we cross-referenced this data with

14     other sources in this project but also in other projects.  For instance,

15     in Srebrenica projects we cross-referenced the ICRC data with a DNA

16     identification records, that is part of exhumation records, and ended

17     with actually very good overlap of the DNA identifications with ICRC

18     missing data.

19        Q.   Now, other than taking the list that was provided by the

20     Prosecution and comparing it against -- and I'd say it's a list of

21     Pionirska Street names and comparing it against the Red Cross database,

22     did you do anything else to verify for the Visegrad area?

23        A.   You mean with other sources.  We did compare the ICRC data --

24     well, records starting with the records from Pionirska Street.  We used

25     the ICRC data for cross-referencing.  We used data from Bosnian book of

Page 2209

 1     death.  We used ICMP records of the identified persons.  We used BCMP

 2     that is the Bosnia commission for tracing missing persons.  So we have

 3     done -- we used the RS mortality database to cross-reference these

 4     records.  A lot of comparisons actually had been done with respect to the

 5     victim lists, including Pionirska records.

 6        Q.   Now, did you cleanse the census?

 7        A.   Well, cleanse, what you mean by cleansing?

 8        Q.   Well, what -- what efforts did you take to cleanse the 1991

 9     census, to verify the accuracy of the census?

10        A.   Well --

11        Q.   Or do you know if it was done?

12        A.   I know a lot of work has been done with the census data back in

13     Bosnia and Herzegovina and also in my unit.  Our focus was the spelling

14     mistakes in the names, because we needed the names for matching with

15     other sources, and we have done a lot of work to clean the names from

16     mistakes, to end with good names that would be good overlapping with

17     other sources.

18             We of course studied JMBG and we studied date of birth.  We

19     wanted to know how much information is missing.  Well, I believe a lot of

20     work has been done here, and also a lot of work has been done in Bosnia,

21     although I must say one part of the census, agricultural part, which we

22     didn't use, wasn't actually cleansed.

23        Q.   Okay.

24        A.   Yeah.

25        Q.   And --

Page 2210

 1             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT:  While we're waiting for the transcript,

 2     Mr. Alarid, may I draw your attention that there is the list of

 3     adjudicated facts and the census is part of the facts that we accepted as

 4     adjudicated facts, and maybe this may allow you to focus your question.

 5             MR. ALARID:  That would, Your Honour, thank you, actually.

 6        Q.   Now, did you discover if Bosnia post-war post 1997 has undertaken

 7     a census in the Republika Srpska?

 8        A.   The 1991 census actually was the last one undertaken in Bosnia

 9     and Herzegovina.

10        Q.   What was the -- in the United States it's every ten years.  What

11     was the pattern in Bosnia?

12        A.   Well, until 1991 it was every ten years.  Since 1991 we haven't

13     had a census in Bosnia.

14        Q.   Okay.  Did you account for any kind of migration?  I know that

15     the Serbian population went up slightly between the two data sets, from

16     1991 to 1997.  Did you account whether this was birth rate or actually

17     migration, new people moving into the community?

18        A.   Well, first of all Serbian population you mean the population of

19     Republika Srpska or --

20        Q.   Of Visegrad, Visegrad?

21        A.   Oh Visegrad.

22        Q.   Of Visegrad.

23        A.   The Serbs in Visegrad, Bosnian Serbs in Visegrad, well, how do

24     you know the actual size of the population after the conflict in

25     Visegrad --

Page 2211

 1        Q.   I --

 2        A.   -- and any other municipality as well?  So there was no census.

 3     We had the voters registration, which is a sample of the post-war

 4     population, a big sample, but it is not that.  It is the size that you

 5     can conclude from this sample.

 6        Q.   Well, and I guess because -- were your numbers in Visegrad in the

 7     1997 voter registration sample, was that strictly people that had

 8     registered to vote?

 9        A.   That is what -- what it was, yes.

10        Q.   So you don't have any accounting for their children who may not

11     be of voting age?

12        A.   No.  The children below age of 18 are not in the sample.

13        Q.   And anyone between 18 and 80 that doesn't want to register, you

14     don't account for them?

15        A.   These people who didn't want to register or they couldn't

16     register are not there.

17        Q.   And in somewhat of a patriarchal society, you may not have women

18     represented fairly in the census?

19        A.   I don't think so.

20        Q.   Not the census.  I'm sorry, voter registration.

21        A.   I would be surprised if it was the case in Bosnia.

22        Q.   Well, and just a standpoint it wouldn't be uncommon for one

23     spouse to register to vote and another spouse maybe not to register to

24     vote?

25        A.   No, but I saw cases where one the same JMBG was used for the

Page 2212

 1     spouses, the wife and the husband.

 2        Q.   Well, and understood, they might go as a couple to register but

 3     also were you able to verify marital status from voter registration?

 4        A.   Why would I be interested in marital status?

 5        Q.   Only to compare and contrast the names, seeing if his wife is in

 6     fact registered?

 7        A.   Well, actually our interest was just to see changes in the place

 8     of residence of people.  This was the crucial question of the study.  So

 9     we didn't look at other aspects of the population.

10        Q.   Now, you can assume that there was some Muslim reintegration into

11     the population.  People did come home.

12        A.   What -- reintegration.  When?  What do you mean by integration?

13        Q.   Well, I mean --

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please observe a pause

15     between questions and answers.  Thank you.

16             THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry, I'm sorry.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  You have to observe a pause between question and

18     answer, both counsel and witness.

19             MR. ALARID:

20        Q.   What I mean by integration is or reintegration is it's possible

21     some people did move back and simply didn't register to vote?

22        A.   First of all, I don't think there were many returns of minority

23     groups on the first place Muslims being the minority group after the

24     conflict ended in December 1995 until the elections, 1997, 1998.  Well,

25     this is one thing.

Page 2213

 1             Second thing, if they returned, actually, and physically lived in

 2     Visegrad, why wouldn't they register to vote and vote actually?

 3        Q.   Well, because maybe they're scared.

 4        A.   I don't get this point, to be honest, because you know first of

 5     all you even didn't have to be there physically in Visegrad to vote for

 6     Visegrad.

 7        Q.   Well, if you move back and someone can go to a county building

 8     and check your ethnicity and your address from voter registration, that

 9     might be a fear factor for someone to reregister to vote?

10        A.   But they didn't have to register in Visegrad to vote for

11     Visegrad.  They could have done this from Sarajevo, from abroad, from

12     anyplace.  They could have registered anywhere and still vote for

13     Visegrad.  If you were so afraid to register, you could have gone to

14     another place and register and then you would escape the attention that

15     you voted actually for this municipality and your party?

16        Q.   Well --

17        A.   So I see no point in this.

18        Q.   Well, because they were disenfranchised people.  Isn't that true?

19        A.   I don't know.

20        Q.   I mean --

21        A.   I --

22        Q.   The conflict in and of itself disenfranchised them?

23        A.   I believe that the registration rate and participation rate in

24     the elections of 1997 and 1998 was relatively high, so I can -- I even

25     give a -- I gave an estimate of this in the report, and I have it here in

Page 2214

 1     the PowerPoint presentation.  So we are speaking of a really big

 2     participation in these elections.  So the sample of voters that we used

 3     in our analysis is without any doubt a big sample, solid data, absolutely

 4     more than good enough to estimate the ethnic composition, not the size of

 5     the population but most certainly the ethnic composition in the Visegrad

 6     in the post-conflict area.

 7        Q.   Well, if you -- if you register to vote in Sarajevo, you can vote

 8     for the local Visegrad election in Sarajevo?

 9        A.   If you registered, but if you can prove that you are eligible to

10     vote you could register in Sarajevo and vote for Visegrad.

11        Q.   Okay.  That would be very inconvenient, though, wouldn't you say

12     if you lived in Visegrad and you're poor?

13        A.   I wouldn't go into this discussion, because this is not any part

14     of my report.  So I gave you numbers.  I gave you sample size.  I gave

15     you a good description of the voters registration, how it was done, who

16     did it.  I can tell you more about it, but I wouldn't like to go into

17     these kind of things, how convenient or inconvenient it was.

18        Q.   Okay.  Well, I'm just -- I'm just exploring the possibilities

19     that the Muslim side of that analysis from a voter registration

20     standpoint could have some potential shortcomings, some unreported

21     peoples that you just wouldn't be able to take into account.  Not your

22     fault but just the limitation of the data set.

23        A.   I wouldn't think so.  I have never heard of ethnic differences in

24     the registration rate for these elections.  What I'm trying to say, I am

25     absolutely unaware of the fact that one ethnic group in a given

Page 2215

 1     territory, in a given region, would register for the elections less than

 2     other ethnic groups.  I -- I -- I have read several reports by the OSCE

 3     related to these elections, some annual reports, and I have never seen

 4     any comment of this kind in these reports.  So I wouldn't believe there

 5     is an ethnic inequality in the registration rate.

 6        Q.   Well, but -- but in fact the Visegrad Muslim -- oh, I'm sorry.

 7     But in fact the Visegrad Muslim population was identified based on

 8     ethnicity and then ultimately persecuted to a certain degree based on

 9     their ethnicity.  So that's why I'm saying maybe they would have a real

10     disincentive to reregister in the area for two reasons.  One is simple

11     fear that they could be reidentified by a similar means at some future

12     conflict because they can't as a person eliminate that this wouldn't

13     happen again, and also recognising what maybe you saw, which is a larger

14     Serb population is now there so not registering from a well, my vote

15     doesn't count, anyway, what deference am I going to make in this

16     population because we are too few to gain seats.  So there's two -- I

17     believe two reasons that someone just, I'm not going to register here.

18     Would that be plausible reasons?

19        A.   No, sir, I'm not with you on this.  I think that I showed in my

20     report that the Muslim population that was originally initially, the

21     disparate in the population census that we identified in the voters

22     registers, moved out from the municipality.  I would take you now -- I

23     will take you now to one of the tables in the report.

24        Q.   Which table, ma'am?

25        A.   This is --

Page 2216

 1        Q.   Is it in your PowerPoint as well or just in the report?

 2        A.   Well, I prefer to go to the report.  This is table 3B on page 13,

 3     English version.

 4             MS. MARCUS:  If it can assist its's marked for identification as

 5     Exhibit P118, 118.

 6             MR. ALARID:  P118.  Page 13.  If the court assistant would bring

 7     that so we all can see.

 8             THE WITNESS:  Page 13, table 3B.  This table is composed of two

 9     parts.  The upper panel are the absolute numbers, and the lower panel are

10     percentages.  So if you look at the Muslims in the first panel, there was

11     an overall total of 6.799 individuals who initially were reported in the

12     1991 census data as part of the 1991 population, and this number we were

13     able to identify in the voters registers.  This is a big sample.  Believe

14     me, statistically speaking I'm very happy with it.

15             MR. ALARID:

16        Q.   I know.  I took statistics in college.  I agree with you.

17        A.   I'm happy we agree, so if we look at the distribution of --

18             JUDGE ROBINSON:  That's the problem, Mr. Alarid.

19             MR. ALARID:  I'm sorry, Your Honour?

20             JUDGE ROBINSON:  That seems to be the problem.  You took it in

21     college.

22             MR. ALARID:  It was a long time ago.

23             JUDGE ROBINSON:  So you want to show off your knowledge.

24             MR. ALARID:  Well, you know, Your Honour, sometimes I don't know

25     what's relevant in the end of this thing so I'm trying to anticipate.

Page 2217

 1     I'm a little confused why we're dealing with so much statistics in an

 2     eyewitness case, but the Prosecution brings it, and so I feel like I need

 3     to address any inaccuracies if there can be, or limitations, but I agree.

 4     I'm very short after this, Your Honour.

 5             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.  I think you can move on now.

 6             MR. ALARID:  Yes.

 7             THE WITNESS:  Shall I continue with this table?

 8             MR. ALARID:

 9        Q.   Yes, sure, explain the table?

10        A.   So in the row for Muslims we see a distribution of the Muslim

11     population who initially was reported in the census and later found in

12     the voters register by place of post-conflict residence.  So one person,

13     exactly one person stayed in Visegrad municipality.  This is the first

14     column titled "This municipality."  The next two columns, "Other

15     municipalities" and "Out of country" show us the numbers from the sample

16     of Muslims who moved out from Visegrad.  So it is the overall number of

17     6.798 persons.  Just the overall total minus one who are reported in

18     other places, not in Visegrad anymore.  So it is not a question of

19     underregistration, of not being there in the sample.  They are there.

20     They are in big numbers.

21        Q.   In other places?

22        A.   In other places.

23        Q.   Okay.

24        A.   So this is how it is.

25        Q.   Just a couple more questions.  Did you account for the fact that

Page 2218

 1     there might have been a nonregistered-to-vote population before that

 2     date, just from the rural and agrarian side of the population?

 3        A.   I don't get the question now.

 4        Q.   Well, I mean were there voter registrations in 1991?

 5        A.   The voters elections in 1991?

 6        Q.   The voter registration.

 7        A.   I don't understand the question, I believe.

 8        Q.   Did you look at voter registration in 1991?

 9        A.   No, I didn't.

10        Q.   Okay.  And I guess comparing the people that were registered to

11     vote, what percentage of the population because that's important in any

12     population is what percentage of the adult voting population that can

13     vote actually registered because there is of course a section of the

14     population that chooses not to.

15        A.   Well, I now take you to my PowerPoint presentation, please, and

16     to page -- which page.  I'm looking for the right page.  Right.  To page

17     15, please.

18             MS. MARCUS:  If it would assist I can give a copy for the ELMO.

19             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, I think so.

20             THE WITNESS:  So what we've been discussing today is actually

21     summarised on page 15 in my PowerPoint presentation.  I never claimed

22     that the sample of voters is complete covering the entire population.

23     The children are there.  The unregistered voters are there.  On the

24     contrary, I on this sheet explicitly mention what is missing in the

25     voters.  One of the issues I discuss is the unregistered voters.  This is

Page 2219

 1     the last paragraph.  So you read there the exact number is unknown of

 2     those who are unregistered, but following the OSCE we estimate that about

 3     12 per cent of the population, 1997, 1998, population of eligible voters

 4     did not register.  The 12 per cent of eligible voters.

 5             Now, the 12 per cent of eligible voters can be easily obtained

 6     using the data from this report, because in one of the tables in the

 7     report I give the overall total of eligible voters, which is 17.800

 8     approximately.  So 12 per cent of this total gives you the 2.146.  That

 9     would be the unregistered voters.

10        Q.   Now, this -- I'm not sure the answer to this question, but did

11     you do a similar analysis for the Serb Muslim population on the other

12     side of the Dayton line?

13        A.   Of the Dayton line.  Well, you don't believe that the Muslims who

14     moved out from Visegrad stayed in the RS area.  I believe there is a

15     table in the report that shows again where they went to.

16        Q.   No.  That's not really the question.  Did you -- the country was

17     split in half?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And so my point is did you do an analysis for the other side of

20     the country?

21        A.   Oh, yes.  In several reports we analysed areas at both sites of

22     the Dayton line in both political entities.

23        Q.   Did you -- were you able to show areas where the Serbian

24     population had gone down in a particular area and the Muslim population

25     of course had gone up probably from this side?

Page 2220

 1        A.   Yes.  It is a two-way process.  So the Muslim population was

 2     moving out from the territories controlled by the RS authority, and the

 3     Serbian population was moving out from the territories controlled by the

 4     Bosnian government.  So that was -- I never said it was a one-way

 5     process.  So Muslims moved out from Visegrad and Serbs moved out from

 6     other territories.

 7        Q.   Okay.  Did you do any --

 8        A.   Have new newcomers in Visegrad, Serbs mainly.

 9        Q.   And did you do any similar location analysis attempting to verify

10     where the Serbs went to where they in fact popped up maybe on the other

11     side of the line?

12        A.   In this report in Visegrad report I have analysed all ethnic

13     groups including Serbs.  So you have categories in the report in every

14     table.

15        Q.   Okay.

16        A.   On the Serbs, on the Serb population.  It is not that this is an

17     unfair analysis.  I treat all ethnic groups exactly the same way.

18        Q.   Thank you, ma'am, no further questions.

19             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic.

20             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

21                           Cross-examination by Mr. Cepic:

22        Q.   Good morning, madam.  My name is Djuro Cepic.  I must admit I

23     envy you because you're going on holiday on Friday.

24        A.   Excuse me one second.  Can I have my transcript back?

25        Q.   [In English] May I?

Page 2221

 1        A.   Yes, yes, please.

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] As I have understood your work so far, for the

 3     needs of the Prosecution you analysed the changes in the ethnic make-up,

 4     and you've already done so in Krajisnik, Plavsic for 37 municipalities,

 5     in the Milosevic case for 47 municipalities?

 6        A.   Yes, that's right.

 7        Q.   Samac, Odzaci, two municipalities, and so on and so forth?

 8        A.    That's correct.

 9        Q.   I would like to dwell only on the reports on the changes in the

10     ethnic make-up, and you will agree with me that there have been at least

11     ten.

12        A.   I don't know exactly the number, but there were many, you are

13     right, yes.

14        Q.   Thank you.  And you will agree with me that all these expert

15     reports dealt with different cases and different time periods in the

16     indictment so that the changes in the make-up of the population were

17     researched for different time periods.  Is that right?

18        A.   Well, the indictment covered different territories and different

19     time frames, indeed.  I agree.

20        Q.   Thank you.  You will agree with me that all these analyses of the

21     ethnic make-up, regardless of the case in question, refer to the period

22     from 1991 to 1997 or 1998.

23        A.   That's right.

24        Q.   Thank you.  And the analysis concerning the changes in the ethnic

25     make-up was something you always did based on two sources of information,

Page 2222

 1     the census of 1991 and the voting lists.

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Could counsel please repeat the years.

 3             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   That's what it says in the report.  I'm sorry?

 5        A.   1997, 8.  I think this is what you meant.

 6        Q.   [In English] Yes, the voting list from 1997 and 1998, yes.

 7        A.   So the question was about the sources, census and the voters

 8     1997 --

 9        Q.   Yes.

10        A.   -- 8.  Yes.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Do these two sources make it possible for you to

12     observe when radical changes in ethnic make-up occurred?  For example,

13     whether it was between 1991 and 1992 or between 1993 and 1994?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Did I understand correctly based on the information in the census

16     from 1991 and the voting lists of 1997 and 1998 that these reports are

17     supposed to show what happened in a period covering seven or eight years,

18     but it is not possible to say precisely what happened between 1991 and

19     1992, or for example, between 1996 and 1997?

20        A.   Well, these analyses we presented in all these reports indeed

21     compare only two moments of time, and this is not like a trend analysis

22     or analysis of what causes resulted in the change.  That is correct.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Now I'll ask you as a demographic expert to explain

24     whether the census of 1991 and the voting lists of 1997 and 1998 are

25     compatible sources as far as methodology is concerned.

Page 2223

 1        A.   Well, it is a simple question, because voters registers is just a

 2     sample of trends of data.  So as it comes to the methodology of the

 3     census I have no doubts this is the best data we can have, the most

 4     complete survey covering the entire population made by statistical

 5     authority, by professionals with a well-designed questionnaire.  Many

 6     work around it before the census, like a trial census, and after the

 7     census, a post census, a control census, a lot of data, cleansing and so

 8     on and so forth.  And voters is just part of the census.

 9             The voters lists were made by taking the census records.  There

10     was no other census in Bosnia, so there was no other way of deciding who

11     is eligible to vote.  So the eligible voters had to be included in the

12     census records in order to register to vote or to prove in another way by

13     ID card or residence permit or whatever else that they were eligible to

14     vote.  For instance, newcomers from other regions of the former

15     Yugoslavia would have to prove additional because they were not on the

16     census records for Bosnia for '91.

17             So when it comes to the methodology of the voters there is not

18     much I can say.  It is just excellent data, simply speaking, because it

19     comes from the census.  Excellent in the sense that I don't have to worry

20     about the coverage.  I know exactly what's the coverage.  It's all

21     registered voters, a big number, and I have all the basic information I

22     need for my work in there included.

23             Of course the deficiencies are there as well as they are in the

24     census, but as long as we understand deficiencies and know how to deal

25     with deficiencies we have a very good chance that we would avoid mistakes

Page 2224

 1     and mislead the audience by producing wrong statistics.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  So we agree that as far as methodology goes these two

 3     sources are not compatible?

 4        A.   Oh, they are compatible.  Why they are not compatible?  That it

 5     wasn't -- voters register is not a survey but it does not mean the

 6     sources are compatible.  On the contrary, they are very compatible.

 7             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic, you didn't do statistics in college,

 8     evidently.

 9             MR. ALARID:  One semester, Your Honour, just one semester.

10             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you.

11        Q.   Madam, would you tell me whether there is any published paper

12     done outside the OTP which used as its source for an analysis of ethnic

13     make-up or migrations voters registers?

14        A.   Well, for Bosnia I wouldn't know, really, not that I published.

15     I know for sure I didn't, but I -- I cannot say what others have used

16     for -- for that, the composition.  For instance, I am aware of a source

17     which comes from the work of Hans Koschnik for instance in Mostar.  He

18     presented his own statistics on the post-conflict population from his own

19     sources by ethnicity.  I wouldn't know exactly what he used as a source.

20     Perhaps just municipal records to which he had access.  I wouldn't know

21     exactly.  But not that I explicitly have seen voters registers published

22     -- well, the ethnic make-up based on voters registration.  And by the

23     way, Koschnik's data are very consistent with the results we obtained

24     from the voters lists, you know.  You can check on the internet.  I can

25     give you the web address for this.

Page 2225

 1        Q.   [In English] Thank you.  [Interpretation] So we can agree that

 2     you have no knowledge of any scholarly paper outside the OTP which uses

 3     voters registers as a source for the assessment of ethnic make-up or

 4     migrations?

 5        A.   Well, not based on the voters registers.  There were -- there are

 6     other things available of course.

 7        Q.   [In English] Thank you, thank you.  [Interpretation] And let's

 8     agree about the census.  It's been 13 years from the Dayton Accords and

 9     peace in Bosnia and there is still no new census.  Isn't that a bit odd?

10        A.   Well, it's a pity for -- to see this, for me as a demographer,

11     because the census is an invaluable source of information about the

12     population, but I believe there have been very good reasons that there

13     was no census.  I wouldn't know exactly what reasons.

14        Q.   Thank you.  The voters registers from 1997 and 1998 that you used

15     as a source of data, do they contain information on ethnic make-up?

16        A.   No, they don't.

17        Q.   [In English] Thank you.  [Interpretation] As there is no original

18     data for '97 and '98, that would mean then that you in a way had to

19     produce it by taking it over from other sources.  Is that correct?

20        A.   Yes, this is correct.  This is what we did using the matching

21     procedure.  We matched the records of the voters registers with the

22     census records.  It wasn't very difficult because, as I said, the voters

23     register is a part of census data.  So linking the two or matching,

24     whatever term you use it's correct, is not very complicated, and in this

25     case a majority of records, at least 2 million, as a matter of fact, or

Page 2226

 1     more can be matched immediately using one numeric character, that is

 2     JMBG, which is in both, in the voters, in the census, so transferring

 3     information between the two is really very, very easy because matching is

 4     not a big --

 5        Q.   Thank you.  [In English] Thank you, thank you.  [Interpretation]

 6     So the census is the only source from which you could derive the ethnic

 7     make-up which you say reflects the actual situation in 1997, 1998?

 8        A.   Yes.  It is the only source and the only source that I wanted to

 9     use.  I didn't want to use reporting ethnicity.

10        Q.   Mm-hmm, [In English] thank you.

11        A.   From any other source because perceptions of ethnicity change

12     over time as we know and depend on political situation, economic

13     situation, all kinds of social processes.  And in order to produce an

14     unbiased analysis you really have to eliminate the bias of reporting of

15     ethnicity and this is why the census ended.

16        Q.   [In English] Okay.  Thank you.  [Interpretation] Can we agree

17     that you in fact are comparing information from 1991 on ethnicity which

18     other information from the same year on ethnicity, and that's only for

19     those voters for whom you were able to take over the ethnic make-up from

20     the census?

21        A.   I am not sure that I understand the question, but I guess your

22     question is about ethnicity of voters.  If you can confirm?

23        Q.   [In English] Yes.

24        A.   Ethnicity of voters, the matched records can be taken from the

25     census, and this is what we do; right?  Having matched the sources, we

Page 2227

 1     can assign ethnicity to every voter record, their ethnicity that was

 2     reported in the census records.  That means unbiased, unchanged, initial

 3     ethnicity.  People identified themselves at the outbreak of the conflict.

 4        Q.   And that was a considerably smaller number of inhabitants, right,

 5     for whom you managed to take over their ethnicity from the census; is

 6     that right?

 7        A.   Well, it is all in the report and in the PowerPoint presentation.

 8     I disagree this was a small number, because the number of matched records

 9     for the Visegrad municipality, out of 17.800, approximately, we achieved

10     to match 10.850 records in the voters register.

11        Q.   Mm-hmm.  [In English] We have that in report.  We already have

12     that in report.

13        A.   It's in the report so I disagree these are small numbers of

14     matched people.

15        Q.   [Overlapping speakers].

16        A.   Any number on ethnicity is a good number coming from a big

17     sample.

18        Q.   Mm-hmm.  [Interpretation] Very well.  Now that we're dealing with

19     this topic, can you assess the degree of reliability of the information

20     on ethnic make-up which you present for the year 1997?

21        A.   I think it's very reliable.  I am speaking of percentages.  As I

22     mentioned earlier the absolute size of the population cannot be concluded

23     from the sample size.  Sample is just a sample.

24        Q.   [In English] Thank you.

25        A.   And we don't know the overall total in the post-conflict period,

Page 2228

 1     but the percentages, that is the ethnic make-up, ethnic composition, are

 2     excellent statistical measures that can be reliably used as for the

 3     ethnic composition.  So the 19 --

 4        Q.   [Interpretation] Can you tell me what the percentage is?

 5        A.   Well, it's all in the report.  We can look at table 3A or page 16

 6     in the PowerPoint presentation.  So the percentage of the Serb population

 7     dropped -- sorry, increased from about 32.62 to 95 --

 8        Q.   [Overlapping speakers] We have it in the report.  We have it in

 9     the report.  Thank you.  Thank you.  But what I'd like to know now is the

10     difference of 40 per cent of the population seems to be missing from the

11     report.  So my question is how can something be correct if 40 per cent is

12     missing?

13        A.   So you refer to the unmatched records, aren't you?  What is the

14     40 per cent?

15        Q.   40 per cent of the population is missing, madam.

16        A.   In my view, nothing is missing from the population.  I am

17     explicit about that for '91 we have a complete data that comes from the

18     census, and when it comes to eligible voters it is 17.883, and when it

19     comes to the post-conflict period voters registers we work with a sample,

20     a sample which is a big-size sample, an unbiased sample because there is

21     no underregistration of any ethnic group.  So we have a sample of 9.241,

22     which is probably about 60 per cent.  As you notice 40 are not there, but

23     a 60 per cent sample in statistics, believe me, it's a very, very good

24     sample.  When we work with samples we don't work with these size of

25     samples because it's simply too expensive and nobody has the resources to

Page 2229

 1     produce these size of samples.

 2        Q.   [In English] Thank you.  [Interpretation] Well, the next thing

 3     I'd like to know is the following:  As you are representing the ethnic

 4     make-up only for the population which is of age, could you tell us what

 5     percentage of minors you have excluded from your observations?  What is

 6     the percentage?

 7        A.   Well, it is all in the report as well, and if you refer to the

 8     slide 15 from the PowerPoint presentation.  So the excluded persons who

 9     were not eligible to vote is 3.316, which is 15.6 per cent of the 1991

10     population.

11        Q.   Mm-hmm.  And we can only guess in the meantime what the birth

12     rate was, because we have no clear data on that; right?

13        A.   Well, we didn't look at the birth rate, so why would I be

14     interested right now at the birth -- in the birth rate?

15        Q.   Well, because newborn babies are also citizens, they're also part

16     of the population; right?  If someone was born in 1992 or 1993, that

17     person is now 15.

18        A.   No, sir.  You're trying to say the new birth could significantly

19     change the ethnic makeup in the post-conflict period.  I don't think so.

20     I don't think so.  This kind of big sample as a voters register is really

21     very close to the overall statistics in the entire population.  I will

22     give you an example from the report --

23        Q.   Thank you.  Thank you.  I have heard your reply.  Thank you.  We

24     do have the report and I have studied it in great detail.

25             You will agree that in your analysis the percentage of 15.6, with

Page 2230

 1     which is not small.

 2        A.   It's not small but it doesn't have a significant impact, if any,

 3     on the ethnic composition obtained from the voters register.

 4        Q.   [In English] Thank you.

 5        A.   That's the beauty of the sample, sir, that we don't really have

 6     to have all the individuals in the sample in order to produce good

 7     statistics, sir.

 8        Q.   Could you tell us to what extent those who have been excluded

 9     from the register influence the validity of your results for 1997?

10        A.   I already answered.  They don't significantly impact on the

11     results I obtained from my sample, not at all.  Look, sir, we can refer

12     to the sample from the report.

13        Q.   [In English] Thank you, thank you, thank you.  You have answered

14     for me.  Thank you and we have report, thank you, Doctor.

15             [Interpretation] Madam, all the voters in 1997, were you able to

16     verify that they actually existed in the census?

17        A.   Well, if -- they come from the census so they existed in the

18     census.  It is not data that was made up by anybody.  It was taken -- the

19     voters register comes from the census.  So the matching rate for the

20     voters as the entire data set is about 80 per cent.  So 80 per cent were

21     matched directly with the census.

22             In my view, knowing that there are deficiencies in the census

23     data, spelling mistakes and some incompleteness of important items, if

24     you achieve a matching rate of 80 per cent, it is a very high matching

25     rate.  So there is no doubt that the voters are, a vast majority of them,

Page 2231

 1     in the census, because it has been proven through the matching.

 2        Q.   So it's not a hundred per cent.  You've just told us it's 80 per

 3     cent, one-fifth, that is.  Does it mean that you're excluding a certain

 4     number of people from the voters registers?

 5        A.   Yes, I do.  The 20 per cent unmatched records are excluded.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  And now I'll ask you a question as a statistician.

 7     In statistics, can one tolerate poor coverage of the population or is

 8     that to be considered an error?

 9        A.   What do you mean by poor coverage of the population?

10        Q.   Well, I understand that your basic professional education is as a

11     statistician, so I'm asking you is poor coverage of the population in

12     statistics tolerated or is it considered an error?

13        A.   But you are very vague in your question.  In order to be able to

14     answer the question I need to understand what a poor coverage is.  I

15     don't really know, because in my study here, census is definitely not the

16     case of poor coverage of the population.  Neither are the voters.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  How much is covered?

18             THE WITNESS:  Census, it is basically the entire population, and

19     the voters is all -- very considerable part of the population.  Well, how

20     much per cent it is?  Let me think.  Yeah, about 80 per cent or

21     something, if I'm not wrong.  So it is again not a poor coverage.  So

22     poor coverage, if -- if -- well, we sometimes work with small samples of

23     1.000 or 2.000 individuals who at present --

24             JUDGE ROBINSON:  I rather expect that's what Mr. Cepic has in

25     mine.

Page 2232

 1             Are you talking about the samples, Mr. Cepic?

 2             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have a difference of

 3     20 per cent.  Those are people who have not been matched, and I'm

 4     interested in that difference of 20 per cent.  In statistics can it be

 5     tolerated or is it an error, because it amounts to one-fifth of the

 6     population which has not been matched, as the doctor has just confirmed.

 7             JUDGE ROBINSON:  All right.  Let me just ask the doctor to

 8     comment on that now.

 9             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

10             JUDGE ROBINSON:  And then Judge David has a question.

11             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Well, as I'm trying to explain, we work with

12     a sample from the voters register.  That the 20 per cent are unmatched

13     and excluded doesn't mean that the remaining records constitute a poor

14     coverage sample, not at all.  Not at all.  There are no rules in

15     statistics how much of the population must be covered in order to work

16     with a good sample.  If a sample is representative, even a small sample

17     of a few hundreds or thousands individuals will be considered a good

18     sample.  It is a matter of how representative the sample is of the entire

19     population.  And I am 100 per cent convinced in this case.  There is no

20     doubt here about the poor -- the good coverage of the sample.

21             MR. CEPIC:  I think that Honourable Judge David.

22             JUDGE DAVID:  I would like to ask you two questions and these two

23     questions are not in order to show you my poor knowledge of inferential

24     statistics.  As you know, you have mentioned always as a proof and

25     reliability and confidence of your conclusions chi-square.

Page 2233

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 2             JUDGE DAVID:  Which is a measure of discrepancy and to my poor

 3     knowledge that measure of discrepancy exclude the possibility of the new

 4     hypothesis which is to say an association by chance.  So you are giving

 5     us in chi-square a high degree of discrepancy which is to say a high

 6     degree of probability that these inferences are unrelated to resolve by

 7     chance.

 8             THE WITNESS:  Well, these results I put in the report are all

 9     shown not to be resulting from chance.  They are shown that the

10     probability of error is extremely low.  It is --

11             JUDGE DAVID:  Second question.

12             THE WITNESS:  -- insignificant.  This is very good question, Your

13     Honour, I must admit.

14             JUDGE DAVID:  Second question.  Can you be -- this is a part of

15     inferential statistics, isn't that correct?  The chi-square is a measure

16     of deviation.

17             THE WITNESS:  Yes, excellent, yes.

18             JUDGE DAVID:  It's a measure of deviation.  Could you say it's

19     part of inferential statistics, which is to say that based on these

20     values, you could obtain what is called empirical generalisations?

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

22             JUDGE DAVID:  Okay.

23             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

24             JUDGE DAVID:  Okay.  Empirical generalisations are not a

25     predictor in the sense of a priori adoptions but you could obtain

Page 2234

 1     reliability and confidence playing from the viewpoint of a statistical

 2     data.  Is that correct?

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes, that is correct.

 4             JUDGE DAVID:  That's all.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Thank you very much.

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Well, Mr. Cepic, apparently you needed to have

 7     Judge David as your teacher.

 8             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.

 9             JUDGE ROBINSON:  But we could go on like this for hours, you

10     know, but I hope you're bringing this to an end now.

11             MR. CEPIC:  I'll try to be fast and to use --

12             JUDGE ROBINSON:  We are not in a university seminar.

13             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Doctor, is my understanding correct, you compare the census

15     results and the voters register.  On the one hand you have information on

16     a part of the population constituted by adults and then on the other hand

17     you have the underage sections of the population comprising maybe 50 per

18     cent, maybe 60 per cent or up to 70 per cent.  Methodologically speaking,

19     can you compare these two kinds of information from two different sources

20     that actually studied different sectors of the population?

21        A.   I think you are wrong by saying that when I use the census data I

22     compare all ages with the voters being above 18 in 1997, '8.  No.  If you

23     look at the report then you see that I only work using the census data

24     with those born before 1980.  This is those who later will become --

25     would become eligible to vote in 1997, '8 elections so I am working with

Page 2235

 1     the same type of information, exactly the same type of information in

 2     both cases.  When it comes to age distribution, of course.

 3        Q.   I think I actually asked you something else.  What about the

 4     methodology?  Is this comparable, the two sources that comprise different

 5     sectors of the population, methodologically?

 6        A.   Well, sir, I think you -- you misread any report perhaps.  Well,

 7     I work with cohort data, that means these are individual data.  I'm

 8     following a group of individuals reported in the census all these

 9     individuals I require to be born before 1980.  I have the individual

10     data.  I can do that.  I can restrict the data.  And I trace them in the

11     voters register.  So these are exactly the same people we are talking

12     about.  They come initially from the census.  I look for them in the

13     voters.  I find them in the voters, I take them and I compare so there is

14     nothing in the methodology you can criticise.  It is a perfect way of

15     doing things, thanks to the fact that I have individual-level sources

16     like the census and the voters.

17        Q.   As an expert, what would be a tolerable statistical aberration

18     [Realtime transcript read in error "statistic collaboration"] in serious

19     research or for the purposes of serious research?

20        A.   Collaboration.

21        Q.   Statistical aberration.

22        A.   Aberration, sorry, aberration.  Well, collaboration is in the

23     transcript.  This is why.  Well, commonly accepted level of error in

24     inferential statistics is about -- is 5 per cent, say.  So that would

25     satisfy your question?

Page 2236

 1        Q.   Statistical error, 5 per cent, yes indeed, that's true.  And what

 2     was the percentage of error in the way names were written in the census

 3     and what was the percentage in voters registers?

 4        A.   Well, I'm -- I am afraid that this question doesn't make sense at

 5     all.  I wouldn't be able to give you an assessment of the error level in

 6     the spelling of names, and this is not inferential statistics of course

 7     so we are not using any test or anything right now.  I have no answer to

 8     this question.

 9        Q.   You have no answer?

10        A.   If I may add --

11             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, please let her add what she wishes.

12             THE WITNESS:  Well, I think this 5 per cent level, it is just a

13     commonly I said accepted, but there are no strict rules in statistics

14     that 5 per cent is accepted but 5.1 is not accepted.  It -- well, error

15     level is an indication of the quality of the find -- of the result.  So I

16     think sticking to these kinds of rules I -- I don't like it simply, you

17     know.  So I could give you an assessment of the errors in the spelling

18     names by, for instance, presenting you with samples of names as

19     originally reported in the census and then later as we corrected them.

20     This can be done and then you can think of the error level, but the thing

21     is that the corrections that we made in the names were very thorough

22     based on three separate procedures which resulted in a great improvement.

23     We see this great improvement when comparing the census data with other

24     sources in cross-referencing with other sources in which the numeric

25     JMBG, the ID, personal ID is unavailable and names have to be used in

Page 2237

 1     matching.  So there is a great degree of consistency in our corrected

 2     names with names reported in other sources and we have a lot of other

 3     sources and good sources as well.  For instance, for mortality we have

 4     two great databases established by professional statisticians from both

 5     RS and federal statistical institutes, and the names in these sources

 6     they are huge databases, all together 140.000 death records and there is

 7     a great overlap of the names.

 8        Q.   Mm-hmm.

 9        A.   So this tells you that the corrections were very good actually,

10     although I cannot assign an error level right now, but I can give you in

11     a descriptive way my assessment of the -- of the corrections and of the

12     improvement.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Do you have complete records on this?

14        A.   What do you mean by complete records?  Statistics you mean?

15        Q.   The errors while you were working and getting this confirmed.

16     Did you keep any sort of records on this?

17        A.   A quantitative error measure you mean, do I have that I can give

18     you for the corrections in the names?  This is what you meant?

19        Q.   Errors, individual errors that you spotted in relation to

20     Visegrad municipality.  Did you keep track of those?  Did you keep any

21     records?

22        A.   Well, we keep track of the corrections.  Most definitely we do,

23     yes.

24        Q.   With all the names?

25        A.   From Visegrad and other municipalities, yes.

Page 2238

 1        Q.   Can we see that, please?  Can that be handed over to us

 2     completely?

 3        A.   I believe it is part of the census data.  You can see it most

 4     certainly.  At our premises in the OTP we will disclose this part of the

 5     census data for your study.  I cannot give you a hard copy because it's

 6     impossible.  But you can certainly have access to it and study it without

 7     any problem.

 8        Q.   I need your records on that, on these errors.  That's what I

 9     need, on an individual basis.  Do you have that or not?

10        A.   I'm not sure that we understand each other, but in my view you

11     are requesting me -- from me two lists, names as originally reported in

12     the census and corrected names.  Is this what you want?

13        Q.   Madam, I'm looking for records on these errors that were noticed.

14     You did some work.  You cross-referenced the names from the voters

15     register to those in the census.  I suppose you kept records on the side.

16     I need records on every name in Visegrad.  That's what I need now.  Do

17     you have that or do you not?

18        A.   Well, I just answered that I do have it and you can have it.

19        Q.   For each name.

20        A.   For each name.  Of course I do.

21        Q.   Thank you.

22             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Just a minute.  Just a minute.  Ms. Marcus, why

23     have you brought this evidence?  It's a simple question.  I think we

24     believe we all know the answer.

25             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honours.  Thank you for the question.  The

Page 2239

 1     evidence was brought as a contextual background to the case, to put the

 2     crimes that have been charged in the contextual setting of the pattern,

 3     of the overall pattern.

 4             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Does it go to the proof of any --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for the President, please.

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Does it go to the proof of any of the -- of any

 7     of the charges?

 8             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, we would say it goes to the proof of

 9     the common elements of the crimes charged, widespread, systematic.

10             JUDGE ROBINSON:  I see.  So it does go beyond mere background.

11             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.  In that respect, Your Honours, yes.

12             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. Cepic.  I think you should be coming to

13     an end now.

14             MR. CEPIC:  I'm trying to do my best, Your Honour.  I'm trying,

15     but this witness is expert, and I -- I really compressed all my questions

16     to make it short and to have the shortest Defence case.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  All right.  Proceed.

18             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you very much.

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Madam, about these records.  Did you enter

20     corrections in relation to names as contained in the original records,

21     the census and so on and so forth?

22        A.   Well, as I said, I have both, the original names and the

23     corrected names.  So the corrections are there.  But without the original

24     items to be changed.

25        Q.   And this will all be made available to us for a look; right?

Page 2240

 1        A.   Yes, here at the OTP.  Yes, you can have access to this.

 2        Q.   Mm-hmm.  All right.  Now -- now, I want to know about this

 3     source --

 4             MR. CEPIC:  May I continue, Your Honour?

 5             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

 6             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   The third source, the ICRC lists, something you mention.  This is

 8     from 1998.

 9        A.   No.  The ICRC list used in the updated report is from 2005.

10        Q.   Mm-hmm.  And that list contains numerous errors.  There are

11     numerous discrepancies between the list that you showed us yesterday and

12     the ICRC list; right?  Because I actually cross-referenced the names in

13     the two lists, and my assistant helped me with that and we realised there

14     were numerous discrepancies.  Would you agree with that?

15        A.   Well, there are some deficiencies in the ICRC list, but I don't

16     think I agree fully with you that the -- there are -- there is a high

17     degree of inconsistencies between the ICRC list and other sources.  I

18     wouldn't agree.  There are inconsistencies.  As I said on Monday, there

19     are errors in the date of birth or date of disappearance.  Yes, there are

20     errors, but this is not -- I wouldn't see it as a large-scale errors.

21        Q.   Sir -- or madam, Mr. Domazet asked you in the Vasiljevic trial

22     that only 20 something persons went missing on the 14th of June according

23     to the ICRC list.  However, according to the indictment that figure, at

24     least according to what the OTP are trying to tell us is quite higher.

25     You will agree with me that this is a striking discrepancy.

Page 2241

 1        A.   It depends how you see the ICRC list.  If you expect that the

 2     ICRC list is a complete source as the census is, then I would say this

 3     discrepancy is striking, but the ICRC nobody claimed is a complete

 4     information about victims from any area in Bosnia.  This list is a very

 5     special source, very different from sources reporting on known deaths.

 6     ICRC list only reports on missing persons of whom we don't know what

 7     happened to these individuals.  The families reported them missing at

 8     some point.  So this is --

 9        Q.   [In English] Thank you.

10        A.   This explains the discrepancy.  We are speaking in the indictment

11     of both, known deaths and missing persons, and ICRC only reports on the

12     missing persons.  There is no way these two sources would give you the

13     exact same overall total of victims on a date.

14        Q.   [Interpretation] Thank you.  And you will agree with me no doubt

15     that when we look at the ICRC information, the only thing that's recorded

16     is the last time a person was seen by whoever reports this missing

17     person.  Is that right?  This is information about when someone was last

18     seen somewhere at a certain point in time.

19        A.   Yes, this is correct.

20        Q.   Thank you.  And the two 0s, if you look at those lists, that

21     means we don't know the exact date or month when a person was last seen.

22     Is that not what it means?

23        A.   In the reported dates, yes.  The code two 0s means no date, no

24     month.

25        Q.   Therefore, we may now conclude that the records are actually

Page 2242

 1     records of when persons were last seen, the ICRC means, I mean.

 2        A.   Well, this is what -- what we agreed on.  These are records on

 3     persons who were last seen at some point.

 4        Q.   In your analysis did you compare the list of missing persons or

 5     when persons were last seen with the list of members of the BH army?

 6        A.   Of what army?

 7        Q.   BH army.

 8        A.   BH army.

 9        Q.   [In English] BH army, yes.

10        A.   At some point we did, especially recently for the use in the

11     Popovic case, we made such a comparison, we cross-referenced the ICRC

12     list with the military records of the BH army, yes.

13        Q.   But that wasn't done in the Visegrad trial because this is not

14     reflected in the report, is it?

15        A.   Yes, it wasn't done, and it can be done if you wish to see this

16     cross-referencing.  I don't see any problem.  Such a result can be easily

17     produced if you wish to see it.  But I want to add that military records

18     is not a proof that the person died in combat situation.  It is just a

19     membership in the army or in an institution related to the army like for

20     instance the Minister of Defence or a person who would work in the

21     production sector providing goods or services to army and died in the

22     conflict would be reported as well.  So I don't think it is -- it depends

23     on what you want to do.  It is just an indication like a monitoring of

24     the status of victims reported by other sources.

25        Q.   Did you perhaps request information in order to ascertain whether

Page 2243

 1     maybe some of the missing persons had taken part in combat, in armed

 2     action and perhaps perished as a result?

 3        A.   Well, I didn't request any information from anybody.

 4        Q.   [In English] Thank you.

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   I'll try to put you questions as fast as I can.  [Interpretation]

 7     Something about your methodology.  Is this the kind of methodology that

 8     is used for purposes of scientific research?

 9        A.   Well, yes, most certainly it is.

10        Q.   Thank you.  In each of your reports you use the matching method.

11     Is this a method that is normally used by demographers?

12        A.   I think it is.  It's used overall.  If you do a Google search,

13     you are talking about nothing else but matching.  There is a big

14     literature body related to matching.  Matching resulted from the field of

15     IT information technology studies and developed very rapidly in recent

16     years, so there is a great number of publications.  If you want I can

17     give you a list.

18        Q.   This method, Doctor, please, I'm trying to get through this as

19     quickly as possible.  Is this method something that is used by

20     demographers generally speaking, yes or no, please, if you can?

21        A.   Yes, especially in historical demography.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Thank you.  Meaning this method is -- [In English] I

23     apologise, Your Honour.

24             JUDGE DAVID:  Dr. Tabeau, is there a possibility to construct

25     through inference some empirical generalisations from your data and,

Page 2244

 1     without asking you to venture now, do you conceive the possibility of

 2     establishing some generalisations or to verbalise these interrelations

 3     that you have shown in your study in a sort of inferential systematic

 4     way?

 5             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I see it possible, yes, yes.

 6             JUDGE DAVID:  Could you give me an example so everybody will

 7     grasp what I'm saying?

 8             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Well, for instance confidence intervals

 9     [Realtime transcript omitted "intervals"] can be associated with the

10     estimated ethnic composition.  This is the first example I can easy think

11     of.

12             JUDGE ROBINSON:  We didn't get that.  What is it that can be

13     associated?

14             THE WITNESS:  Confidence intervals can be associated with the

15     estimated ethnic composition based on the voters data.  So this would be

16     a formal error measurement that can be offered in order to tell the

17     reliability statistically speaking of these results.  When it comes to

18     matching, there can be formal measures of error associated with the

19     matching results as well, and this can be presented in a formal way as

20     well.

21             JUDGE DAVID:  Thank you very much.

22             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

23             MR. CEPIC:  I'm sorry, may I continue, Your Honour?

24             JUDGE ROBINSON:  I'm still trying to see whether I understood

25     confidence intervals.

Page 2245

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  This is a statistical concept showing as a

 2     matter of fact more than just the point estimate that is now presented in

 3     the report.  In table 3A as far as I remember I am showing ethnic

 4     composition as percentages, and these are actually like point estimates.

 5     Just one single number for every ethnic group.  But as a matter of fact,

 6     because I've been working with a sample, this is just one of possible

 7     values for this per cent.  There might be a range of values associated

 8     with the point estimate, and this range can be required to contain values

 9     that are highly probable.  Let me say 95 per cent confidence interval

10     would show us the values that are -- were produced with 95 per cent of

11     confidence, so at the 5 per cent error level.  And I can assure you we

12     have done something exercise of this kind that confidence intervals

13     associated with these kind of measures of ethnic composition will be very

14     narrow because of the big sample size.

15             JUDGE DAVID:  A second point, Dr. Tabeau.  As to the

16     interrelations of the variables of ethnicity that you have in location

17     that you have detected, could also be that they could be -- we could

18     generalise and establish interrelations, you know, in a sort of axiomatic

19     mode.

20             THE WITNESS:  Well, I'm not sure I understand the question fully.

21             JUDGE DAVID:  The -- from empirical generalisations could we

22     construct an orderly system of inferences around the interrelation of

23     variables that you have shown in the study?

24             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, I think I understand what my brother is

25     saying, because I don't think you answered his question.  I believe his

Page 2246

 1     question was whether from all the data that you have garnered you're able

 2     to -- to make some generalisations.  So the confidential interval is not

 3     a generalisation.  He's asking whether you can make some inferential

 4     generalisation on the basis of the data that you have.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Well, I -- I'm not sure that I understand, but I

 6     believe that certain general conclusions I try to put forward in this

 7     report, and I didn't associate any error level for these general

 8     observations, but I think that general conclusions based on results

 9     obtained in a statistically responsible manner most certainly can be seen

10     as reliable.  So I concentrated in this report on presenting the

11     statistics as reliable because they are reliable.  This is good

12     statistical material, and when drawing general conclusions I didn't

13     actually repeat the fact that they are solid statistical conclusions but

14     they are.  They are.  Any general observation of the kind, for instance,

15     as I am saying that these dramatic change in the ethnic composition could

16     not result from normal demographic or socioeconomic factors.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  I see.  So you have in fact --

18             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I do have in this report.

19             JUDGE ROBINSON:  -- made conclusions, drawn conclusions.

20             THE WITNESS:  And they are summarised in the report and

21     presentations.

22             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

23             THE WITNESS:  So they are all based on solid statistical material

24     which can be formally associated with error levels and therefore the

25     conclusions can be taken as responsible and statistically reliable.

Page 2247

 1             JUDGE ROBINSON:  In fact, the purpose of Mr. Cepic's

 2     cross-examination is to challenge the validity of those conclusions,

 3     because to the extent that he succeeds in challenging them, then he -- he

 4     plants a dent in that part of the Prosecution's case that relies on -- on

 5     your data as evidence of, say, widespread and systematic crimes.

 6             THE WITNESS:  Well, it is --

 7             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.  Judge --

 8             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT:  I, too, have a question, Dr. Tabeau,

 9     just to be clear about your conclusion at the end of your PowerPoint.

10     Maybe it is in your report, but what I would like to know is in terms of

11     the numbers in the Visegrad region for the month of -- month of May and

12     June, 1992, how many persons went missing, how many disappeared, and how

13     many died.  Do we have -- I'm sure it's somewhere in your report, but can

14     you, just to guide me through your report give me those precise numbers.

15             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

16             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT:  How many went missing, how many

17     disappeared, and now deceased.

18             THE WITNESS:  Well, actually the term disappeared and missing are

19     used as synonyms so it is both the same category.  This is just a --

20             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT:  Because you say 62 per cent of

21     missing all missing disappeared so ...

22             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Of all missing in '92, these appeared during

23     these two months.

24             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT:  Right, I see.

25             THE WITNESS:  So this is another [overlapping speakers] ...

Page 2248

 1             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT: [Overlapping speakers].

 2             THE WITNESS:  Yes, exactly.  Well, if I can -- in relation to

 3     this conclusion, if we can perhaps can use slide 25 of the PowerPoint

 4     presentation.

 5             MS. MARCUS:  I have it for the ELMO if you'd like.  Sorry, I have

 6     it for the ELMO.

 7             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

 8             THE WITNESS:  So slide 25.  I show in this table, which is in the

 9     report, the distribution of going missing by month of disappearance

10     starting with April 1992 until December 1992.  It is just the year 1992.

11     All ten municipalities in the Visegrad region are included.  We are

12     looking at the Visegrad, which is of course the main point of interest,

13     and starting from May and then continuing in June and in July the numbers

14     are extraordinary high.  So -- and this is actually typical of the

15     region, so that means in other municipalities we see the same pattern,

16     and when only the two numbers for May and June of the missing persons are

17     taken into account, all together these two months account for about 62

18     per cent of all missing in 1992.  This is a very big number knowing --

19             JUDGE VAN DEN WYNGAERT:  Do we know how many people deceased?  Do

20     we know that?

21             THE WITNESS:  Well, we don't know this.  I can't answer straight

22     away.  It would be necessary to put pieces of information together.  We

23     have victim lists from the indictment.  We have additional victims.  We

24     have missing persons.  All these put together would result in overall

25     numbers of victims.  I would have to do that, but it can be done.  But

Page 2249

 1     the number of missing in '92, the entire year '92 as shown on slide 22 is

 2     2.528, which is a big number, which is a very big number, yes.  Yes.

 3     Thank you.

 4             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. Cepic -- well, we are now a minute

 5     beyond the time for the break, so we'll adjourn.

 6                           --- Recess taken at 10.21 a.m.

 7                           --- On resuming at 10.43 a.m.

 8             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. Cepic.

 9             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

10        Q.   Dr. Tabeau, I'll try to make the specific questions, and if you

11     are able to give me short and precise answers just to pass this as fast

12     as we can.  Thank you.

13             [Interpretation] Madam, looking at these tables, let's have a

14     look at table number 9.  It's on the screen, so let's look at it briefly,

15     because I'm intrigued by something I noticed in this data.

16             [In English] Could we have on the screen page -- the previous

17     page, please.

18             MS. MARCUS:  If you tell us which page I'll be happy to give you

19     the page for the ELMO.

20             MR. CEPIC:  21st page in hard copy.

21             MS. MARCUS:  Is this on the report or the PowerPoint?

22             MR. CEPIC:  From report.

23             MS. MARCUS:  I'm sorry.  That's Exhibit P118 marked for

24     identification.

25             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

Page 2250

 1        Q.   Madam, while we're waiting for it to come up, Mr. Helge Brunborg

 2     and you on the -- you drew up a report on Srebrenica, did you not?

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter missed the date.

 4             THE WITNESS:  We actually wrote several reports together on

 5     Srebrenica with Helge Brunborg, yes.

 6             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   I'm asking you about the one of the 16th of November.  In that

 8     report it says with respect to the Srebrenica municipality, and it caught

 9     my eye, that 6.000-odd people are missing, but in your report I see 3.144

10     persons missing in Srebrenica and that's a considerable difference.

11        A.   Yes, but if you would paid more attention and read more parts of

12     this 16 November report then you will see that we used the term

13     Srebrenica area, not just for one municipality, Srebrenica.  It was a

14     broader area including Srebrenica and a number of neighbouring

15     municipalities in the region.  So this explains the difference.  It was

16     not just one municipality, Srebrenica.  It was a region of Srebrenica, a

17     broader area.  As people were moving from Srebrenica, you know, through

18     the woods towards Tuzla and to Potocari.

19             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Thank you.  You have given the explanation.

20     Let's move on.

21             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you.

22        Q.   [Interpretation] We mentioned your method.  The method you spoke

23     about is used by institutions with a good operative system which makes

24     reliable matching possible.  In other words, it's used by countries where

25     every citizen has a personal identification number or an ID number which

Page 2251

 1     is known to be reliable; is that right?

 2        A.   Well, there are two things.  There is linking and matching.

 3     Actually some people including us use these terms as synonyms.  As a

 4     matter of fact, linking would be what you just mentioned, combining

 5     sources, at the individual case level through numeric characteristic like

 6     unique personal ID, but there is a broader approach which is called

 7     matching and this approach is used as well in the absence of such unique

 8     numeric characteristics of individual.  Instead of one number, one

 9     personal ID used in linking, in matching we use the number of descriptive

10     data items in order to find related person of record representing one the

11     same person.  And matching is also used by renown institutions and

12     scholars --

13        Q.   Thank you.

14        A.   -- everywhere.

15        Q.   [Interpretation] I understand that this method of matching is

16     reliable.  Is there a reliable operative system ensuring precise

17     correspondence in the demographic department?  Have you established a

18     system that will enable reliable matching and reliable identification of

19     every person?  Just reply briefly, please.

20        A.   Yes, we do a system.  Otherwise we wouldn't be able to show these

21     results.  It is a system based on a database software programme, MS

22     Access.  We have a system of databases, linked databases that are all

23     programmes in MS Access.

24        Q.   [In English] Thank you.  [Interpretation] How many criteria are

25     needed for matching to considered reliable?

Page 2252

 1        A.   Well, sometimes you need three, sometimes one, sometimes 50,

 2     sometimes 20, sometimes 70.  It depends on the specificity of your

 3     sources and the matching rate of course.  Sometimes it is possible using

 4     three simple criteria to match 85 per cent of records from a given

 5     source, and you can use a lot of additional criteria to achieve a

 6     marginal matching improvement of 2 per cent or something, and then I

 7     would say it's enough to use three matching criteria in this case, but

 8     you might disagree and say not at all.  You might need 70.

 9        Q.   How many did you use, how many criteria?

10        A.   As I mentioned earlier today, matching the census with the voters

11     was relatively easy because of the availability of the personal ID

12     numbers JMBG in both the census and the voters, so using this one single

13     criteria we were able to match more than two million records.  There were

14     few additional criteria used.  I wouldn't be able to mention the exact

15     number, say five whatever, so it was a relatively few criteria, and this

16     is related to the specificity of these two sources but when we were

17     matching the ICRC list of missing persons with the census, in this case

18     the list was far longer.  It was about the 70 criteria that we used and

19     in this case we didn't have the JMBG in the ICRC records so we had to use

20     the descriptive item such as names, date of birth, place of birth and in

21     this case a large number of criteria are required and the results of

22     identifying the potential candidate matches have to be inspected

23     visually, most of them if not all, in order to declare the true matches.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know how many people there are in the census

25     or the voters registers who have the same first and last name and the

Page 2253

 1     same year of birth?

 2        A.   Oh, the same first name?  I wouldn't give you an immediate

 3     answer.  If you are interested I can check this in the census records and

 4     come up here with the numbers.  I can tell that it is very unlikely that

 5     in a small area as Visegrad, for instance, it is just a municipality of

 6     about 21.000 individuals, that you would see many duplicated records with

 7     the same names, first name, father's name, surname, date of birth and

 8     additionally place of birth, although there might be some with common

 9     names but not many.  It's very unlikely to have duplicates on all these

10     descriptive items.

11        Q.   I'll give you an example and you can check it in your department.

12     There are 69 persons in the voters registers called Mirsad Halilovic.

13     Eight of them were born in 1965.  In the census there are 86 people named

14     Mirsad Halilovic, and 14 of them were born in 1965.

15             When matching data by first and last name and year of birth in

16     the voters registers and the census, these people will match.  As the

17     father's name is not mentioned in the voters registers, how do you know

18     which Mirsad is the right one to be included in the data for Visegrad?

19        A.   First of all it is a wrong example because the matching was done

20     using the JMBG for most records, so we wouldn't see these problems, and I

21     believe that also among these records with the same names some would be

22     matched during -- using the JMBG.  So we wouldn't have to answer the

23     question.  But -- well, there is a technique called blocking in matching,

24     so that means blocking is eliminating records from a given source that

25     are unlikely to be matched with a certain group of records.  So blocking

Page 2254

 1     increases the probability of finding the true match in -- between the

 2     matched pairs of records and we applied the blocking technique when

 3     matching the data on missing persons, for Visegrad in particular.  So

 4     these two charts that we prepared and were marked for identification next

 5     to -- to my expert report.  So matching was done using blocking

 6     techniques, meaning eliminating records unlikely to be the true matches,

 7     which was --

 8             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic, you have used one hour.

 9             MR. CEPIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ROBINSON:  I'm not really inclined to allow you much more.

11     I would say another ten minutes.

12             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I'll try to do my best.

13        Q.   [Interpretation] Madam, in many cases you have to make a decision

14     only based on a visual inspection in order to identify a person

15     correctly; is that right?

16        A.   That is correct, but I wouldn't call it only, you know.  The

17     latest development -- well.  Okay.

18        Q.   Thank you.

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Will you tell me in your report for Visegrad, how many visual

21     corrections did you enter?

22        A.   Visual corrections in matching you mean or --

23        Q.   Yes.

24        A.   Well, we didn't make any corrections.  Visual inspection is

25     something what we do when inspecting potential or candidate matches.  We

Page 2255

 1     compare the complete record of information.  That is much more

 2     information than what is used in matching.  In every source.  So we have

 3     a complete census record on one hand and a complete census record from

 4     the missing persons list, and the visual inspection is just studying

 5     these two records and declaring whether this match is the true match and

 6     not only just a candidate, right?

 7        Q.   [In English] Thank you, thank you.

 8        A.   So this is why it is not only inspection.  It is all the best we

 9     can have in this case.  For instance, in the latest matching techniques

10     artificial intelligence is used but training sets are provided to the

11     computer based on visual inspection by a person, by a human being.

12     There's nothing better than that.

13        Q.   Thank you.  [Interpretation] Why is there not a single piece of

14     information in your report on how many criteria you used and how many

15     cases were matched according to which criteria?  For example, if you used

16     the first and last name, the father's name, the date and place of birth

17     and the place of residence as your criteria and you matched 20 per cent,

18     and if you used just the first and last name without the father's name

19     and so on, you match 50 per cent of the cases.  Would it not be

20     professional and correct for you to have indicated this in your report?

21        A.   Well, I think my report is very professional and if I would

22     disclose in this report every single step I have made to achieve these

23     results, believe me, you wouldn't be able to go through these thousands

24     of pages.  This is why not everything is documented in this way.  Most

25     certainly we do register the type of matching criterion for every record

Page 2256

 1     matched.  So if you want it, we can make such an exhibit for you that you

 2     could study these criterion by criterion, but as I mentioned in the case

 3     of missing-persons list it was about 70 criterion we used for matching

 4     the census and an overview of matching results can provided by the

 5     criterion.

 6        Q.   [In English] Thank you.  [Interpretation] Did you conceal this

 7     information, because based on it we could evaluate the reliability of

 8     your results and to what extent your results are actually a product of

 9     your calculations?

10        A.   I'm not sure I understand the question, but, well, any questions

11     you may have in relation to the matching results you can have from me.

12     Moreover, I included the list of missing persons from Visegrad by name in

13     the report.  Any single name from this list can be cross-referenced with

14     any other list that you may have or the Prosecution may have.  So I don't

15     think there is much secrecy here.  I can -- whatever you want, please put

16     forward a request and I will do my best to -- to provide you with what

17     you need.

18        Q.   I already have, but I was refused.

19        A.   This is not true.  I said you will have the names that you

20     wanted.

21        Q.   Why did you not include the statistics of comparison in your

22     report?

23        A.   What kind of comparisons do you mean?

24        Q.   Well, we've spoken about it up to now.  It's for you to give me a

25     response, madam.

Page 2257

 1        A.   I'm not sure I know what the comparisons are, but I think --

 2     well, anything more you want can be provided.

 3        Q.   Very well.  Thank you.  Through a -- using a table you explained

 4     to my colleague Mr. Alarid that many people moved away and you explained

 5     this through percentages, but you will agree with me that you cannot

 6     establish when this was occurring most intensively, because you don't

 7     have the relevant information for that.  Is that right?

 8        A.   You are speaking about the analysis of IDPs and refugees.  I

 9     would disagree that I cannot establish when people are going missing,

10     because I used an additional source in the same report, this is the

11     missing persons list, and the missing persons list --

12        Q.   But the missing persons list is not the same as the displaced

13     persons list.  These are two completely different categories, madam, and

14     you'll agree with me that these two categories are completely different,

15     displaced persons and missing persons.  Just answer me this:  Is this the

16     same category or are they two different categories?

17        A.   Missing persons -- report on missing persons, however, it can be

18     seen that distribution, time distribution of going missing as an

19     indication of increased activity, perhaps combat activities, perhaps

20     other activities in the same territory, and this additional information

21     on the timing of going missing tells you in what area there were

22     extraordinary events causing large number of missing persons.  And if we

23     look at the distribution of the missing persons for Visegrad

24     municipality, then you will see a totally different distribution than the

25     one for Srebrenica and Bratunac.  For Srebrenica and Bratunac you will

Page 2258

 1     see the highest number of missing in 1995.  And if you do it by month you

 2     will see it around July 1995 and later.

 3        Q.   [In English] My apologies for interrupting.  I didn't ask you for

 4     Bratunac, Srebrenica and other municipalities.  I put you a specific

 5     question.  So I just ask you to distinguish.  Is it the same category

 6     missing person and internally displaced person or refugee, yes or no?

 7        A.   These are different categories of the [overlapping speakers] ...

 8     [Realtime transcript read in error "These are the same category"]

 9        Q.   You haven't got reliable sources for that kind of information,

10     yes or no, please?

11        A.   I believe I did use reliable sources on both, IDPs, refugees, and

12     missing persons.

13        Q.   [Interpretation] Madam, we have just established that the only

14     reliable information you acquired was the one from the census and the

15     voters registers.  There is a Red Cross report on missing persons, yes or

16     no?

17        A.   I disagree.  I didn't agree that only census and the voters are

18     reliable sources, not the missing persons.  I didn't agree on this.

19        Q.   Why didn't you mention those additional sources in your report,

20     and what additional sources are they?

21        A.   I think -- I just mentioned that I did use the missing persons

22     list, but you mean IDPs and refugees, additional sources on that; right?

23        Q.   Madam, I'm the one asking questions here.  Thank you.  Would you

24     please assess the degree of reliability of your data on changes in the

25     ethnic make-up in Visegrad and explain to us to what extent your findings

Page 2259

 1     from the period from 1991 to 1997 are relevant in the case of Visegrad

 2     where you are supposed to show that was happening between 1992 and 1994?

 3        A.   Well, we agreed that the sources I used show that make-up on two

 4     moments of time and this is not a time serious trend analysis, anything

 5     like that.  We agreed on that.  However, you should read this report as a

 6     whom, not pieces of it.  So the period between '91 and '97, that is the

 7     conflict period we are talking about, from '92 to '95 is first of all

 8     covered by the UNHCR statistics that I also for contextual purposes

 9     included in my report, and this is table --

10        Q.   [In English] I haven't seen UNHCR report.

11        A.   It's there.

12        Q.   You used that in Srebrenica case, in some other cases.

13        A.   It's there, believe me.  I know.  This is table 4, page 15 in the

14     report.  These are internally displaced persons from Visegrad reported by

15     UNHCR as of 1998.

16        Q.   [Interpretation] But you have not a single report from the

17     relevant period; is that right?

18        A.   Well, it is not that this reports for relevant periods exist,

19     sir.  This is why we're using other sources.  And the statistics of '98

20     by UNHCR is again the result of the process of going missing -- sorry, of

21     the process of displacement that was happening during the conflict.

22        Q.   [In English] Thank you.  [Interpretation] And if we look at table

23     4 nowhere can we see Visegrad municipality.  Tuzla, Kakanj, Visoko,

24     Sarajevo and so on are the municipalities mentioned, but there's no

25     mention of Visegrad or any other municipality in Eastern Bosnia.

Page 2260

 1        A.   But you are misreading the table, because here is the destination

 2     municipality where they arrived after having left Visegrad.  So this --

 3             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic, three more questions and then we must

 4     finish.

 5             MR. CEPIC:  I just have two, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

 7             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Madam, please assess the degree of reliability of your missing

 9     persons list and tell us whether you checked whether there are fictitious

10     persons on that list.  That's the question before last.

11        A.   Well, fictitious persons is a very interesting issue.  You would

12     have to define the fictitious person first for me, but I did check the

13     ICRC list of missing persons first by cross-referencing this list with

14     the census, and the matching rate was very high for the ICRC list, not

15     lower than 40 voters.  It was certainly more than 80 per cent, one thing.

16             The other thing could -- I also cross-referenced the list of ICRC

17     missing persons for the Srebrenica area with the records of DNA

18     identification obtained from the international commission for missing

19     persons in Sarajevo, and the overlap of the -- the DNA identifications is

20     a very reliable source.  This is actually the best way individuals

21     exhumed from mass graves can be identified with a great degree of

22     certainty.

23             The overlap of these two lists for Srebrenica, Visegrad is part

24     of the Srebrenica area, was very extremely high.  About 96 per cent or

25     more of the ICMP records of the DNA identifications have been reported in

Page 2261

 1     the ICRC missing persons list.

 2        Q.   [In English] Thank you, thank you, thank you.

 3        A.   So that is the assessment of reliability.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  We have expert for that issue.  It is not related to

 5     you and to demographic changes.  We heard Dr. Clark about some other

 6     things.  And I disagree with you, Srebrenica is not a part of Visegrad,

 7     the opposite.

 8             And the last question:  [Interpretation] In drawing up your

 9     reports, you receive instructions from the OTP.  You're asked to analyse

10     a certain or data for a certain period of time, and if you do not have

11     the relevant information for the relevant time, do you then receive

12     instructions to use what you have or is that a decision you make on your

13     own?

14        A.   I am not instructed by my colleagues from the Prosecution what I

15     am supposed to do.  I have the indictment, and I myself choose sources

16     and methods and compose my report.

17        Q.   Thank you very much.

18             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic.

19             MR. CEPIC:  Thank you very much, doctor.  Thank you, Your Honour.

20     I apologise for a little bit longer examination.  I haven't got any

21     further questions.  Thank you one more time.

22             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Ms. Marcus.

23             MS. MARCUS:  Thank you, Your Honours.

24                           Re-examination by Ms. Marcus:

25        Q.   Dr. Tabeau, just before my colleague Mr. Cepic asked you, and I'm

Page 2262

 1     quoting from the transcript page 51, line 11, Mr. Cepic said "I ask you

 2     to distinguish is it the same category missing person and displaced

 3     persons or no?"  Your answer there at line 13 is recorded as:  "These are

 4     the same category."  Can you clarify this answer, please?

 5        A.   No, this wasn't my answer.  I said these are not the same

 6     categories, displaced and missing persons.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Dr. Tabeau, what is the most updated version of the

 8     ICRC missing persons list?

 9        A.   Well, this list is constantly updated.  We use for this report

10     the 2005 version but in 2007 I think the eighth edition of the ICRC list

11     was published and there is a web site on the internet in which this data

12     is updated four times a year or something like that.

13        Q.   When -- when someone is listed as missing on the ICRC list and

14     then turns up alive, is the ICRC list then adjusted?

15        A.   Yes, it is.  These persons are taken off from the list.  So are

16     other unrelated individuals.  There are -- there is another category of

17     administrative exclusions that are possible.  Misreported records,

18     administrative exclusions might relate to duplicated records, things like

19     that, so these two categories are taken off from the list.

20        Q.   So similarly, following from that if a body is exhumed and

21     identified with DNA evidence is that name then removed from the missing

22     persons list?

23        A.   From this one on the web site because the web site reports only

24     on this --

25             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic.

Page 2263

 1             THE WITNESS:  -- listing --

 2             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic.

 3             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, by your leave, DNA

 4     analysis and these other questions have to do with another expert and

 5     another expert report.

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  How do they arise, these questions?

 7             MS. MARCUS:  There was a lot of discussion about the reliability

 8     of the ICRC missing persons list.  In fact, this line of questioning, I

 9     only have one more, is directly in response to Judge van den Wyngaert's

10     questions in relation to the missing persons list, just to clarify about

11     dead and what is supposed -- what the relationship is according to

12     Dr. Tabeau between the missing persons and persons who are dead.

13             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Well, ask it quickly.

14             MS. MARCUS:

15        Q.   What would you say is the likelihood that someone is still on the

16     ICRC missing persons list from 2005 or 2007 and is still living?

17        A.   I think it is very low, the per -- the survivors are just taken

18     off.  I think what they do, ICRC also closes their cases when they have

19     evidence about the death of a missing person so they actually have

20     separate categories of still missing, known dead, closed cases and

21     another category is still missing with information about the body

22     available but case not yet closed.  So by presenting the data in this way

23     they try to keep the audience informed about the progress in the

24     identifications and they cooperate closely with ICMP for instance with

25     respect to identifying individuals and closing cases.

Page 2264

 1        Q.   Thank you very much, Dr. Tabeau.

 2             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, I have no further questions.  I would

 3     just like to tender into evidence the three exhibits which are pending.

 4     The first one of course is the updated expert report.  I recognise this

 5     is the subject of a pending motion so of course that's up to Your

 6     Honours.  That's Exhibit P118.

 7             And then there are the two demonstrative exhibits, P119 and P120.

 8             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic.

 9             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, by your leave these

10     demonstrative exhibits, I don't see any foundation for them.  I don't see

11     any grounds, because we have clear annexes in Dr. Tabeau's report,

12     whereas these tables are composed solely on the criteria of the

13     indictment.  I don't see their relevance.  I don't see how documents

14     composed in this manner can be admitted as exhibits, because we already

15     have the annexes in the indictment where the victims are clearly

16     enumerated.  Thank you.

17             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, there's been much debate about these

18     charts.  I'll just say that Dr. Tabeau authenticated these -- both these

19     charts one by one on the 22nd of September, two days ago, on pages 78 and

20     79 of the transcript and they are the only way that the Chamber can

21     find -- it's a simplification the Chamber's work and the Defence work of

22     searching through the full missing persons list of all persons missing in

23     Visegrad.  Dr. Tabeau and her unit have pulled out the records of the

24     names from the indictment and some additional names that have come up in

25     the evidence from that list to facilitate the work.  It's merely answer

Page 2265

 1     exercise in facilitating the work of the Chamber.

 2             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic.

 3             MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] By your leave, Your Honours, we have

 4     a clear source, the Red Cross and then on the other hand we have the

 5     indictment, but this is a third thing.  This is a hybrid source in my

 6     view.  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Are you saying it's one too many?

 8                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 9             JUDGE ROBINSON:  We'll admit the exhibits.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, Exhibit number P118, P119, P120

11     will change their status and will become exhibits.

12             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Doctor, that concludes your evidence.  We thank

13     you for giving it, and you may now leave.

14             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

15             JUDGE ROBINSON:  The next witness.

16             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, the Prosecution would be recalling

17     Mr. Kustura to complete his cross-examination.  As you recall,

18     yesterday --

19             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

20             MR. GROOME:  -- we interrupted because of the translation

21     problem.  Your Honour, the translations are just beginning to arrive.  I

22     think two of them have been provided.  The rest should be imminently

23     available.  Perhaps I may suggest a practical solution to this problem.

24     Both Defence teams now have a lawyer on the team that is fluent in the

25     language of the original document.  Perhaps they could assist whoever is

Page 2266

 1     doing the examination in reviewing the documents.  Perhaps they've

 2     already done this.  I mean the documents only take about five minutes to

 3     read, and then before the cross-examination concludes I expect the

 4     translations would be available so if they wish to tender any of the

 5     translations they would be available for tendering.

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  And I rely on you when you say the documents

 7     only take about five minutes to read.

 8             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, the total material is about eight and a

 9     half pages of written material.

10             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Let the witness be recalled.

11                           [The witness entered court]

12             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Please show the witness to his seat.

13                           [The witness takes the stand]

14                           WITNESS:  ISLAM KUSTURA [Recalled]

15                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

16             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Kustura, yesterday you made a declaration to

17     the effect that you would speak the truth and nothing but the truth, and

18     I want to let you know that you remain subject to that declaration.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.

20             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. -- is it Mr. Alarid or Mr. Cepic?

21             MR. ALARID:  No, I was finished, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Mr. Cepic then -- Mr. Dieckmann.

23             MR. DIECKMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.

24                           Cross-examination by Mr. Dieckmann:

25        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Kustura.

Page 2267

 1        A.   Good morning.

 2        Q.   My name is Jens Dieckmann, and I am Defence counsel for

 3     Mr. Sredoje Lukic.

 4        A.   [Microphone not activated] hear you probably.

 5        Q.   Thank you very much.

 6             MS. MARCUS:  I'm sorry, the witness just said he can't hear you

 7     properly.

 8             MR. DIECKMANN:  He can't.

 9             JUDGE ROBINSON:  He can't hear --

10             MR. DIECKMANN:  Can't, okay.

11             JUDGE ROBINSON:  He can't hear properly.

12             MR. DIECKMANN:

13        Q.   Is it better now?  Can you hear me better?

14        A.   Yes.  Yes, it's better.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Let me say again my name is Jens Dieckmann and I am

16     Defence counsel for Mr. Sredoje Lukic.

17        A.   All right.  I understand.

18        Q.   Thank you.  First and foremost, I want to offer you on behalf of

19     the Defence team of Mr. Sredoje Lukic and of my client condolences for

20     the loss of your sons and the suffering you went through.

21        A.   Thank you.

22        Q.   I will put my questions to you with all respect for this pain you

23     suffered.  I have only a few questions, and I will put them to you as

24     short and as precisely as possible, and I would highly appreciate if you

25     could answer my questions in the same manner, short and precise if it's

Page 2268

 1     possible.

 2        A.   Fine.

 3        Q.   If you do not understand the question, please indicate it

 4     immediately and I will try to rephrase my question.

 5        A.   All right.

 6        Q.   Mr. Kustura, yesterday during the examination by the Prosecution

 7     you were asked to provide names of detainees in the Uzamnica camp who

 8     were members of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  I refer to page 63,

 9     line 1 of the provisional transcript.

10             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, could I request private session if any

11     names are going to be mentioned?  The witness cannot use a pseudonym

12     sheet for reference.

13             MR. DIECKMANN:  I'm well aware of it.  Thank you very much.

14             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Okay.  Private session then.

15           [Private session]  [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of Chamber] 

16             MR. DIECKMANN:  And your answer was, I quote -- I'm sorry.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honours.

18             MR. DIECKMANN:

19        Q.   And your answer was, and I quote:  "There was one.  The name

20     escapes me now."

21   (redacted)

22        Q.   Thank you.  Thank you, sir.  This answer of you leads me to my

23     first question to you.  Mr. Kustura, do you agree with me that in general

24     it is easier to recall details of recent events than to recall details of

25     events that occurred a long time ago?  Would you agree with me?

Page 2269

 1        A.   A long time ago, yes, yes.  I don't remember.  One forgets

 2     everything, doesn't one.

 3        Q.   Thank you, sir.  Another question:  With regards to the time you

 4     spent in the Uzamnica camp, yesterday you stated that you have been

 5     detained in the Uzamnica camp for three years and ten days.  This is page

 6     71, line 23.

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Could you please reflect upon this once again.  Would it be

 9     possible that you have been detained during --

10        A.   Two years and ten days.  That's how long I was detained in that

11     camp.

12        Q.   Thank you, sir.  This would be my question:  It was from the 3rd

13     October 1992, up to the exchange of prisoners in October 1994?

14        A.   1992 to 1994, yes.

15        Q.   Excellent.  Thank you very much.  Since we are in private

16     session, I can ask you, you were with (redacted) during your time of

17     detention in Uzamnica; true?

18        A.   Yes.  Yes.  I found him when I arrived there.  He had been

19     captured earlier on.

20        Q.   For how many months you have been together at the Uzamnica camp

21     with him?  Do you remember this?

22        A.   Up until the very end when I was exchanged.

23        Q.   Thank you.  And (redacted) was also detained in Uzamnica

24     together with you.  True?

25        A.   Yes.  Yes.  He was a soldier.  They captured him at Meremislje.

Page 2270

 1        Q.   And for how many months have you been together with him in

 2     Uzamnica?

 3        A.   Sorry?

 4        Q.   How many months you have been together with (redacted) in

 5     Uzamnica?

 6        A.   Well, I found him when I got there.

 7        Q.   And did you spend the whole time up to 1994 or left he before in

 8     another time?

 9        A.   All the time.  All the time throughout.

10        Q.   Thank you.  I think we could go in public session now.

11             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, open session.

12                           [Open session]

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.

14             MR. DIECKMANN:

15        Q.   And the third person I would like to ask you is Nurko Dervisevic.

16     You have been together with him?

17        A.   Yes, yes.  They took 22 of them away.  My uncle was there and

18     another man from Dobrun.  Twenty-two of them taken away.

19        Q.   Thank you.

20        A.   Nurko was left there so he could milk the cows for them.

21        Q.   Thank you, sir.  And Mr. Dervisevic was together with you the

22     whole time up till October 1994?  Is it true?

23        A.   Yes, the whole time.

24        Q.   And he was there when you arrived in Uzamnica camp, true?  He was

25     already there?

Page 2271

 1        A.   Who?

 2        Q.   Mr. Dervisevic.

 3        A.   Yes.  Yes.  He was there when I got there.

 4        Q.   Thank you very much.  And you lived with them in the same hangar

 5     the whole time you were in Uzamnica up to October 1994?

 6        A.   All together in this building, the hangar.

 7        Q.   And when will soldiers came to mistreat you or others, you were

 8     mistreated in this one hangar; true?

 9        A.   All of us there in that one building, yes.

10        Q.   Was it in this way that the soldiers took prisoners one by one to

11     a corner of the room and mistreated them there in a corner of the hangar?

12        A.   No.  It wasn't like that.  When Milan would come by he would

13     first kick everyone in the stomach, and then he would go on beating them.

14        Q.   Thank you.  So when you were beaten inside this hangar by these

15     soldiers, these beating were automatically observed by the other male

16     detainees in this hangar.  True?

17        A.   All -- all the others, yes.  There was me.  There were other

18     people.  There were yet some other people, and everybody saw that.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Kustura, you knew Sredoje Lukic prior to 1992.

20     Is it true?

21        A.   Yes.  Yes.  He was with the police in Visegrad.

22        Q.   How long had you known him for prior to 1992?

23        A.   Well, I can't quite remember.  I know that he was a policeman in

24     Visegrad.

25        Q.   Could you tell us what is the colour of Sredoje Lukic's hair?

Page 2272

 1        A.   He was kind of blondish at the time.  I'm not sure about now.

 2        Q.   Yesterday you stated that Milan Lukic is one metre 90, or 180

 3     centimetres tall.  I refer to page 83, line 21.  My question is, is Milan

 4     Lukic taller than Sredoje Lukic as far as you remember?

 5        A.   Yes.  Yes.

 6        Q.   Could you estimate how much taller Milan Lukic is than Sredoje

 7     Lukic, in centimetres perhaps?

 8        A.   Taller by about 20 cent.

 9        Q.   20 centimetres, yes.  Did I understand you correctly, 20

10     centimetres?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             MR. DIECKMANN:  I'm sorry, Your Honours.

14                           [Defence counsel confer]

15             MR. DIECKMANN:

16        Q.   Sir, I put it to you that Sredoje Lukic has always had brown hair

17     and that he is in fact taller than Milan Lukic.

18        A.   No, no.  He isn't taller.

19        Q.   Sir, I put it to you that Sredoje Lukic did not mistreat you

20     during the two years you were detained in Uzamnica camp and that your

21     memory is so far not reliable.  Do you understand what I put it to you?

22        A.   What do you mean my memory's not reliable?  Sredoje and Milan

23     both beat us, together.

24        Q.   Mr. Kustura, you gave an interview to the security service centre

25     in Sarajevo in 18 November 1994.  Is it true?  Could you remember this?

Page 2273

 1        A.   Yes.  I've given countless statements in Sarajevo.  That's why I

 2     was in the camp for so long.

 3        Q.   It must be five weeks after your release this first interview you

 4     gave in November 1994.  Is it true?

 5        A.   Yes.  And then I was interviewed near the Miljacka river.

 6             MR. DIECKMANN:  I would ask the court usher to call the document

 7     2D02-0026.  Could we please scroll down to page 3 of the B/C/S version.

 8     I'm sorry.  I'm sorry.  Perhaps please go back to the first page of he

 9     B/C/S version, please.

10        Q.   At the beginning, the first paragraph, it is said that you are

11     born the 15th February 1930 in the locality of Zlatnik, Visegrad

12     municipality.  Is it true?

13        A.   Yes.  Yes, that's true.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Now I would like to go to the last page, to page 3 on

15     the B/C/S version.  And if it's possible, perhaps could we show the part

16     with the signatures at the bottom bigger.  Yes.  Thank you very much.

17             Mr. Kustura, I saw you entering the courtroom without a cane or

18     any physical support of the court usher, and therefore by knowing that

19     you have problems with your eyes, I would like to ask you to look at the

20     screen, and I would like to ask you if you could see there your name on

21     the screen in front of you.

22        A.   The -- I see a little, but not really.

23        Q.   So you cannot see that there is your signature on the screen?  Is

24     that your signature on the screen?

25        A.   Kustura Islam.

Page 2274

 1        Q.   And below this line Kustura Islam, what you see there, this is

 2     your signature.  True?

 3        A.   Does it say Kustura there?

 4        Q.   Yes.

 5        A.   Yes, I see that.  Kustura, that's what it says.

 6        Q.   And this is your signature?  Is it true?

 7        A.   Yes.  Yes.

 8        Q.   Thank you very much.  In this interview, you had the opportunity

 9     to give all names of victims and perpetrators you were aware of and you

10     know at the time; correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And I would like to read to you the last part before the

13     signatures.  "With regard --" I quote:  "With regard to the above, I have

14     nothing else to add.  The statement has been read out to me loud and

15     clear, my words have been inserted in it, I accept it as my own and as

16     such and I put my signature on it.

17              "The conduct of authorised officials during this interview was

18     proper."

19             This was the statement you have signed?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Thank you, sir.  Mr. Kustura, in this statement from 1994 given

22     five weeks after your release, you have been able to provide a total of

23     16 names of several Serbian guards and outside soldiers who allegedly

24     mistreated you and others in Uzamnica.  True?

25        A.   Yes, but I think I must have forgotten the first and last names

Page 2275

 1     by now.

 2        Q.   So in November 1994, you were able to recollect in detail names

 3     of individuals who allegedly mistreated you and others?

 4        A.   Yes.  Yes, all of the names.  I could still remember all of the

 5     names back then, but I've since forgotten them.

 6        Q.   Thank you, sir.  And, Mr. Kustura, is it not true that you did

 7     not mention Sredoje Lukic a single time in this statement you gave just

 8     five weeks after your exchange?  True?

 9        A.   I know why I didn't mention him, because Sredoje was always

10     together with Milan, and whenever I mentioned one I thought the other was

11     implied.

12        Q.   Thank you, sir.

13             MR. DIECKMANN:  We would like to tender this into evidence, this

14     document.  Is it admitted?

15             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, it will be admitted as Exhibit

17     number 2D19.

18             MR. DIECKMANN:

19        Q.   Mr. Kustura, now I want to read a text to you, and later on I

20     will ask you to tell me and the Court if you know this text as a

21     statement of you.  Yes?  Do you understand?

22        A.   No, not really.  The text, what text?

23        Q.   I will read to you a text to you and later on I will ask you

24     questions regarding this text.  Could we proceed in this way?

25        A.   All right.

Page 2276

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2        A.   Go ahead.

 3             MR. DIECKMANN:  I would ask the court usher to call the document

 4     2D02-0884.

 5             JUDGE ROBINSON:  What is this?  Mr. Dieckmann?

 6             MR. DIECKMANN:  Yes.  This is an excerpt of a book.  I have here

 7     the title, "Hronika Genocida nad --" "Chronicle of the Genocide in

 8     Bosnia, published in 1996 and the author is Mr. Ibrahim Kljum, and it

 9     contains on page 293 and 294 an excerpt, a transcript of an interview the

10     witness has given to television company in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and this

11     is complete quotation of this document, and I would like to read out the

12     first paragraph to him.

13             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Let me understand.  You say it contains an

14     excerpt of an interview given by the witness, meaning this witness.

15             MR. DIECKMANN:  This witness, yes.  This witness.  And perhaps --

16     yeah.  That's it.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.  Let me hear it.

18             MR. DIECKMANN:  Thank you.

19        Q.    "I --"

20             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, excuse me.

21             JUDGE ROBINSON:  You have the date?  What date was this?  What

22     date?  What was the date of this interview?

23             MR. DIECKMANN:  I'm sorry, I didn't --

24             JUDGE ROBINSON:  What was the date of the interview?

25             MR. DIECKMANN:  The date of the interview broadcasted is the

Page 2277

 1     21st -- pardon, the 22nd January, 1995.  It was broadcasted in the TV of

 2     Bosnia and Herzegovina studio Sarajevo.

 3             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

 4             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, perhaps counsel could lay a foundation

 5     to make sure this is the same person.

 6             MR. DIECKMANN:  This is exactly the reason why I would like to

 7     read it out to him and to ask him about this text, if this is his

 8     statement and if he could recollect --

 9             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.  Go ahead.

10             MR. DIECKMANN:  Thank you.

11        Q.    "I.K. ... at the beginning of April, when our neighbours from

12     the neighbouring village Jablanica started firing at my village Zlatnik,

13     we fled to Visegrad, and afterwards to Gorazde.

14        A.   [No interpretation]

15        Q.   Without expecting what would happen to us later on, we returned

16     home after Uzice Corps of the JNA came to Visegrad.  In the beginning --

17        A.   [No interpretation]

18             MR. DIECKMANN:  Perhaps the transcript could reflect the comments

19     of the witness we could hear.  He said two times yes, as I've heard.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

21             MR. DIECKMANN:

22        Q.   "In the beginning it was calm.  We were working on the land

23     planting vegetables."

24        A.   Yes.  Yes.

25        Q.   "All until the JNA departed from Visegrad."

Page 2278

 1        A.   From Visegrad, yes.

 2        Q.   It was then that Chetniks started conducting crimes?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   So on 25 of May 1992.  "They invaded Zlatnik?"

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   "They captured me, my son Ahmet and two other neighbours?"

 7        A.   Ibrahim and Ahmet and all those women were taken prisoner.

 8        Q.   "They brought us to the nearby creek.  They beat and maltreated

 9     us, and afterwards they took Ahmet to the creek."

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   "We heard gunfire."

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   "Then they brought Avdo as well, and we again heard --"

14        A.   Ibrahim, yes.

15        Q.   " ... and we again heard gunshots."

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   "One Chetnik took me and another neighbour, and on the way he

18     told us to run, that he will not shoot."

19        A.   That he wouldn't shoot, yes.

20        Q.   "We did not believe him."

21        A.   No, we didn't.

22        Q.   "But we set off quickly along the creek and we heard shots being

23     fired in the sky."

24        A.   Yes.

25             JUDGE ROBINSON:  How much longer is this?

Page 2279

 1             MR. DIECKMANN:  I think --

 2             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Are you getting to the point?

 3             MR. DIECKMANN:  Yes.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I saw my son in the creek, and

 5     Ahmet.  I saw my Ibrahim and him lying in the creek, in the water.  My --

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Thank you.

 7             MR. DIECKMANN:  Thank you.

 8        Q.   Mr. Kustura, do you remember that you have given this statement

 9     to Bosnian television and that this interview was broadcasted later on?

10        A.   Yes.  Yes, yes.  Certainly.  Now I remember, yes.

11        Q.   And isn't it true that you did not mention Sredoje Lukic in this

12     interview being broadcasted on the 22nd January, 1995, as being one of

13     the perpetrators in Uzamnica?  Isn't it true that you did not mention him

14     at all?

15        A.   No, no.  He wasn't there.  It was our neighbours, Serbs.  Sredoje

16     was on the other side.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  When you say the other side, what do you mean?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Visegrad.  He was slaughtering

19     and killing people in Visegrad.

20             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, I think there may be some confusion.

21     I think that because of the passage that Mr. Dieckmann read to the

22     witness he's speaking about a portion prior to the Uzamnica.  This may

23     have led to the witness to be somewhat confused.  Perhaps a clarification

24     would help.

25             MR. DIECKMANN:  Yes, Your Honours.  There is later a passage

Page 2280

 1     regarding the Uzamnica camp and I propose that I put this part of the

 2     statement to the witness regarding the situation in Uzamnica camp which

 3     has more things to do we are talking about.

 4             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Could counsel's microphone be switched off when

 6     the witness is responding because the shuffling of papers is very loud in

 7     the microphone and makes it difficult to understand the witness.

 8             MR. DIECKMANN:  Yes.  Thank you.

 9        Q.   Mr. Kustura, I will read you another part of this TV programme.

10     It is in the middle of the second paragraph of the English version.

11     "They took us to the Uzamnica camp where many captured Bosniak civilians

12     were held.

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   "The men were in one hangar while women and children were in

15     another hangar."

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   "Which was 13 and 13 metres."

18        A.   Yes, more or less.

19        Q.   "At night drunken Chetniks together with Milan Lukic came to the

20     camp.  They mercilessly beat us with their hands, feet, sticks, piling,

21     with everything ..."

22        A.   Yes, that's right.  Yes, with everything.

23        Q.   And this is your statement about the situation in Uzamnica camp.

24     True?

25        A.   Yes, in the Uzamnica camp.

Page 2281

 1        Q.   And I ask you again, you did not mention Sredoje Lukic at all in

 2     this statement from January 1995 broadcasted in Bosnian television?

 3        A.   I didn't recall him at the time, which is why I didn't mention

 4     him, but he was always together with Milan.

 5        Q.   Thank you, sir.  Thank you very much.

 6             MR. DIECKMANN:  Your Honours, we would like to tender this part

 7     of this book into evidence.

 8             MS. MARCUS:  Objection.

 9             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

10             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, I'd like to object.  The witness has

11     confirmed some parts and has made corrections.  In fact his son's name

12     was not even mentioned and his son's name was first -- they said his son

13     was Ahmet.  He corrected two corrections, and only certain portions were

14     have been put to him.  This statement has not been read back to him.

15     It's a transcript of an interview.  He never had an opportunity to

16     actually authenticate the entirety and therefore it's not authenticated

17     by the witness.

18             MR. DIECKMANN:  I'm well able to read the whole transcript to him

19     if I may with the leave of the Chamber.

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Okay, the Trial Chamber, I dissent, will not

22     allow it.

23             MR. DIECKMANN:  Your Honours, we just found this material

24     recently, and in the moment we are conducting investigations to find this

25     broadcasted interview with him, and we would submit this DVD with this

Page 2282

 1     programme in a later stage with the leave of the Chamber.

 2             JUDGE ROBINSON:  A later stage of the --

 3             MR. DIECKMANN:  When we receive it.

 4             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes.

 5             MR. DIECKMANN:  As soon as -- if we receive it.

 6             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Is that the one that we just refused?

 7             MR. DIECKMANN:  It is the -- the part of the programme that was

 8     broadcasted with him in person, yes.

 9             JUDGE ROBINSON:  We just denied the -- its admission.

10             MR. DIECKMANN:  I thought it was just the transcript which was

11     published in the book.

12             MR. CEPIC:  Your Honour, with your leave I think the witness

13     confirmed that he gave the interview to the broadcasting company from

14     Bosnia.  He confirmed the date.  He confirmed that that happened.

15             JUDGE ROBINSON:  The Trial Chamber has given its decision and I

16     see no need to reconsider it.

17             MR. DIECKMANN:

18        Q.   Mr. Kustura, I have finally some question referring your

19     testimony yesterday, and I would like to go in private session for just

20     one question.

21             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Private session.

22          [Private session] [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of Chamber] 

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're in private session.

24             MR. DIECKMANN:

25        Q.   Mr. Kustura, you told us yesterday and I refer to page 73, line

Page 2283

 1     10 to 16, that Mr. (redacted) and Mr. (redacted), and I

 2     refer to page 63 and line 2 of the provisional transcript, both suffered

 3     the same mistreatments by Sredoje Lukic as you and the other men in the

 4     hangar.  This was your testimony yesterday.  True?

 5        A.   Yes, that's correct.  It's correct.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7        A.   Sredoje and Milan, both of them.

 8        Q.   Thank you.

 9             MR. DIECKMANN:  We could go back to public session.

10             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Open session.

11                           [Open session]

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.

13             MR. DIECKMANN:

14        Q.   Mr. Kustura, I read your testimony very carefully, and if I

15     counted correctly, you mentioned 12 times in an almost stereotypical

16     manner that Sredoje Lukic allegedly did exactly the same things as Milan

17     Lukic did to you and to the other people in the hangar.  For example, on

18     page 66, line --

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   "Sredoje was with him, it means Milan always."

21        A.   Always.  He was always with Milan.  Whenever Sredoje arrived,

22     Milan arrived also.  Whenever Milan arrived, Sredoje arrived also.

23        Q.   Mr. Kustura, did you know that Nurko Dervisevic knew Sredoje

24     Lukic for 15 years before 1992?

25        A.   Yes, he certainly knew him because Nurko lived in the town.  I

Page 2284

 1     lived in the village.  He knew Sredoje certainly, and Nurko was in the

 2     police.

 3        Q.   And did you know that Nurko Dervisevic was detained in total 28

 4     months in Uzamnica, from June 1992 to October 1994?

 5        A.   I found him in the camp.  I found Nurko in the camp, and we were

 6     exchanged together.

 7        Q.   Did you know that Nurko Dervisevic has also lost two of his sons

 8     during the war?

 9        A.   I didn't know that, but the Chetniks always said they'd killed

10     his son here and killed his son there, but whether or not that was

11     correct after I was exchanged, I didn't see Nurko again.

12        Q.   Would you change your mind today if I tell you that Nurko

13     Dervisevic testified before this Court that he allegedly saw Sredoje

14     Lukic only one occasion during the whole period of his 28 months

15     imprisonment in Uzamnica camp?

16        A.   How can that be?  He always came together with Milan.  Whenever

17     Milan arrived, Sredoje arrived also.

18        Q.   Sir, do you know -- do you know any reason why Nurko Dervisevic,

19     who lost two of his sons and suffered in consequence of his imprisonment

20     would lie?

21             MS. MARCUS:  Objection.  This is calling for speculation, asking

22     one witness to challenge the credibility of another.  Not appropriate.

23             MR. DIECKMANN:  I asked him if he know a reason.

24                           [Trial Chamber confers]

25             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Answer the question, Witness.

Page 2285

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know that he lost two of

 2     his sons.  The Chetniks would always tell him, "This son of yours was

 3     killed here.  That one was killed there," but what actually happened, I

 4     don't know because I didn't see Nurko again after we were exchanged.

 5             MR. DIECKMANN:

 6        Q.   Excuse me, sir, just one more time.  Do you know any reason why

 7     Nurko Dervisevic should lie?

 8        A.   I don't know why he would lie that he lost two sons.  I don't

 9     know that he lost any sons.

10             MR. DIECKMANN:  I don't have any further questions.  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Thank you.  Ms. Marcus.

12             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, I have no further questions for this

13     witness.

14             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Now, Mr. Kustura, you have given your evidence,

15     and it is now concluded.  You may leave.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I may leave.

17             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Yes, you may leave.  You don't want to stay, I

18     presume.  Perhaps you're beginning --

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Take this off.

20             JUDGE ROBINSON:  -- to like the court.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Microphone not activated] [No

22     interpretation].

23                           [The witness withdrew]

24             JUDGE ROBINSON:  Now, the next witness.

25             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, the Prosecution has no additional

Page 2286

 1     witnesses for today.  We would ask that we adjourn until tomorrow morning

 2     when Zehra Turjacanin will be ready to testify, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ROBINSON:  In the circumstances, we an adjourn until

 4     tomorrow at 10 minutes to 9.00.

 5                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.01 p.m.,

 6                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 25th day of

 7                           September, 2008, at 8.50 a.m.