Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 20105

 1                           Monday, 2 December 2013

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.33 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone in and around this

 6     courtroom.

 7             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.

 9             This is the case IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             The Chamber was informed that the Prosecution wanted to raise a

12     matter before we hear the evidence of the next witness.

13             Ms. Bibles.

14             MS. BIBLES:  Thank you, Your Honour.  And good morning.

15             Your Honours, just to briefly talk about the nature of the way in

16     which Dr. Treanor's report and testimony will be tendered.

17             In light of the extensive adjudicated facts in this case which

18     were based upon his report and his previous testimony, we've adopted a

19     very abbreviated approach to his reports and testimony today.

20             I would like to place those adjudicated facts on the record.

21     They are 6, 13, 15 through 17, 19, 30 through 33, 38, 40, 44 through 46,

22     52, 54 through 58, 60, 62, 69, 70 and 71, 73, 75, 76, 78, 80 through 82,

23     85 through 87, 99, 100, 114 to 117, 119 and 120, 122 to 127, 131, 132,

24     137, 144, 170, 180, 220, 223, 224, 226, 228, 231, 233 to 239, 370, 455,

25     and 1118.

Page 20106

 1             Obviously, if any of these areas are challenged on cross

 2     cross-examination, we will revisit the areas of the report and documents

 3     which address those points.

 4             It is worth noting that we're taking an approach similar to the

 5     one we took with the report of Dean Manning, in which we relied on

 6     certain portions of the report, although, in this situation, for slightly

 7     different reasons.

 8             And, Your Honours, finally, I will do not do a public summary for

 9     this witness and will advise the Trial Chamber that he does have clean

10     copies of his reports with him, and he will be bringing them into the

11     courtroom.

12             With that, Your Honour, we're -- I believe we're prepared.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could the witness be escorted in the

14     courtroom.

15                           [The witness takes the stand]

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Treanor.  Before you give

17     evidence, the Rules require that you make a solemn declaration.  The text

18     is handed out to you now.

19             May I invite you to make that solemn declaration.

20             THE WITNESS:  I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

21     whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

22                           WITNESS:  PATRICK TREANOR

23                           Examination by Ms. Bibles:

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please be seated, Mr. Treanor.

25             Mr. Treanor, will you first be examined by Ms. Bibles.  You'll


Page 20107

 1     find her to your right.

 2             Ms. Bibles, you may proceed.

 3             MS. BIBLES:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 4        Q.   Sir, can I ask you to please state your full name for the record.

 5        A.   My name is Patrick Joseph Treanor.

 6             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I'd ask that the Court Officer bring

 7     the first page of 65 ter 13537 -- excuse me, 15573, Dr. Treanor's CV to

 8     our screens.

 9        Q.   As your copy of your CV appears on the screens, could you tell us

10     whether this document was prepared before your retirement from ICTY?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles.

12             MS. BIBLES:  Yes.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  I'm afraid this is not the correct number, 15573.

14     Could it be 13573?

15             MS. BIBLES:  Thank you.  My apologies.

16             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I believe this document was prepared before my

17     retirement.

18             MS. BIBLES:

19        Q.   And --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't have a document before me yet, but what is

21     the right number?  There we are.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Just for the record, this is number document

23     number 13573.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I think Mr. Treanor answered your question.

25             MS. BIBLES:  Yes.

Page 20108

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 2             MS. BIBLES:

 3        Q.   When did you retire?

 4        A.   I retired at the end of 2009.

 5        Q.   Since your retirement, have you reviewed any documents which may

 6     have come in to the possession of the Office of the Prosecutor?

 7        A.   You mean new documents?

 8        Q.   New documents, yes.

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   And since this transcript was -- or excuse me, this CV was

11     prepared, you've testified in the case of Prosecutor versus

12     Radovan Karadzic?

13        A.   That's correct.

14             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, at this time I would tender

15     65 ter 13573 at this time.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear no objections.

17             Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 13573 receives number P3001

19     Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  P3001 is admitted.

21             MS. BIBLES:

22        Q.   Have you had an opportunity to review excerpts from your

23     testimony in the Karadzic case?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Can you confirm that the transcript accurately reflects your

Page 20109

 1     testimony at that time?

 2        A.   Well, the portion of the transcript that I recently reviewed

 3     does.

 4        Q.   Is there anything that you would add to the transcript that you

 5     reviewed regarding your reports?

 6        A.   No, the portion of the transcript that I reviewed related to the

 7     methodology that I used in writing my reports.  I would only add to state

 8     explicitly, that I was the -- the person ultimately responsible for

 9     everything that went into the report.  I decided what went into the

10     reports based on my expert opinion, and that I was careful in my

11     methodology to reference by footnote virtually every statement or at

12     least every paragraph in the report so that the documents were allowed to

13     speak for themselves and it was made clear which documents were speaking

14     in regard to particular statements.

15        Q.   If you were asked today about the substance of your testimony

16     aside from these two additions -- or with these two additions, would your

17     answers be the same?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Having taken the solemn declaration, do you affirm the

20     truthfulness and accuracy of your testimony in the Karadzic case?

21        A.   Yes.

22             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 30425 which are the

23     excerpts of testimony of Dr. Treanor in the Karadzic case.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 30425 receives number P3002,

Page 20110

 1     Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

 3             MS. BIBLES:

 4        Q.   When you were --

 5             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  May I invite both speakers not to overlap, but to

 6     pause between question and answer and the next question.  It's very

 7     important because the last answer was missing.  The "yes" after line 10

 8     and 11 of page 5, that you affirmed the truthfulness and accuracy of your

 9     testimony in the Karadzic case, and the witness said "yes."

10             MS. BIBLES:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11        Q.   When you're reviewing documents for the purposes of your

12     research, you work from the English translation or from the original

13     documents?

14        A.   I worked from the original B/C/S versions of the documents, as

15     did most of the other members of my team.

16        Q.   To ask one more question in addition to those asked in the

17     Karadzic case regarding your selection of documents, could you describe

18     for us how you assess the value of a historical source when selecting

19     materials for inclusion in your reports?

20        A.   I considered to the most value sources the various types of

21     documents that were generated by the -- the party under consideration in

22     a given report, in the case of these reports they would be the Bosnian

23     Serb leadership, so we focused on collecting and analysing documents

24     produced by the highest level, political; that is, political party

25     organisations and state organisations of the Bosnian Serbs.  Those are

Page 20111

 1     the -- the primary and most important sources that I used, and as I say

 2     we made a very intensive methodical search for these documents in an

 3     attempt to acquire them and analyse them and eventually utilise them in

 4     these reports.

 5        Q.   I'd like to turn now to your report, "The Bosnian Serb Leadership

 6     1990 to 1992."

 7             MS. BIBLES:  And I'd ask that 65 ter 02881 be brought to our

 8     screens.

 9        Q.   We see this report signed by you in 2002.  Can you tell us the

10     scope and purpose of this report.

11        A.   The purpose of this report was to outline the origins and

12     developments of the principal political structures that were developed by

13     the Bosnian Serbs.  That is, the -- the Serbian Democratic Party and

14     its -- its organs, and the principal organs of the Republika Srpska that

15     they -- the Bosnian Serb leadership eventually founded.  It deals with

16     the period commencing in approximately 1990 and ending at the -- the end

17     of 1992.

18        Q.   Are there any limitations or considerations we should be aware of

19     in reviewing this report?

20        A.   No, I wouldn't say so.  The documentation that we had available

21     at that time offered a fairly complete picture of -- of those

22     developments, and any documents that I saw after that basically only

23     tended to confirm the -- the main outlines of the report.  There are

24     certainly many details that could be filled in.  But in general terms,

25     the -- the main thrust of the report and the various sections on the

Page 20112

 1     party and the state organs are -- have held up very well.

 2        Q.   I'd next like to turn to 65 ter 11849, the report Bosnian report

 3     titled: "The Bosnian Serb leadership: 1993 to 1995, addendum to the

 4     Bosnian Serb leadership."

 5             Could you please describe how the contents of the report we see

 6     on the screen relate to your 2002 report?

 7        A.   Well, this report is -- is basically a continuation of the

 8     previous report.  It continues the -- the stories, if you will, that were

 9     told in the original report about the -- the SDS and the -- the various

10     organs of the Bosnian Serb republic forward until the end of 1995.

11             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I'd ask for both of these reports to

12     be marked for identification, pending the completion of the witness's

13     testimony.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, numbers to be assigned?

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 02881 receives number P3003.  And

16     document 11849 receives number P3004, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  P3003 and P3004.

18             MS. BIBLES:  I'd like to begin by discussing the Assembly of the

19     Republika Srpska.

20        Q.   Your report details that the Bosnian Serb Assembly was created by

21     the decision of the SDS Deputies Club on 24 October 1991.  Could you very

22     briefly describe what the SDS Deputies Club was?

23        A.   Well, the -- the SDS Deputies Club was one of the several

24     Deputies Clubs in the Assembly of the Socialist Federal Republic of

25     Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Each political party had -- there was

Page 20113

 1     represented in the assembly, organised what they -- in their terminology

 2     call a club, in the US we call that a party caucus, in which the

 3     members -- the delegates to the assembly who are members of that party

 4     met and discussed what positions they would take on matters before the

 5     assembly.  So the Deputies Club of the Serbian Democratic Party consisted

 6     of 60-odd members.  I believe that's -- the details are given in the

 7     report.  It also included one member of the -- the SPO, the Serbian

 8     Movement for Renewal, they had one delegate and he met with their club.

 9     That encompassed almost all of the members of the assembly who were of

10     Serbian nationality.  I think there were five or six members of Serbian

11     nationality who were not members of the club, but the SDS Deputies Club

12     included almost all of the Serbian members of the assembly.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles, in order to avoid any confusion, the

14     transcript may not be entirely clear as what I said in relation to P3003

15     and P3004.

16             Both are marked for identification.

17             Please proceed.

18             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, if the Court Officer could bring

19     65 ter 11284, which is a transcript of the session of the SDS Deputies

20     Club and founding the assembly, to our screens, please.

21        Q.   While this document is coming to our screen, I'll ask you whether

22     prior to this date in October of 1991 was there an openly separate

23     governing body of Bosnian Serbs?

24        A.   Well, there was no separate governing body of the Bosnian Serbs

25     on the -- at the centre on the -- central level in Bosnia and

Page 20114

 1     Herzegovina.  There -- there had been established on the regional level a

 2     certain -- or referred to as autonomous regions or districts by the --

 3     under the auspices of the SDS which encompassed certain municipalities in

 4     various regions of the country, but at the central in Sarajevo at the --

 5     the -- the level of the republican government, there was no separate

 6     Serbian institution.

 7        Q.   Could -- could you tell us what the significance is of the

 8     decision that is reflected in the transcripts for which we have the first

 9     page on our screens.

10        A.   Well, basically what occurred at this session was the foundation

11     of a separate assembly for the Bosnian Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina by

12     the SDS Deputies Club.  That is -- that new Serbian Assembly included all

13     the members of the Deputies Club and other Serbian delegates to -- or

14     deputies to the Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and

15     Herzegovina were invited to attend to join as well.  All of the members,

16     in other words, were -- had been elected as deputies to the Assembly of

17     the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and at the session,

18     however, they declared that they would have their own Serbian Assembly

19     which would be the -- the highest law-giving body for the Serbs in Bosnia

20     and Herzegovina.  They would only recognise such decisions that were

21     taken by the regularly constituted governing bodies in Bosnia and

22     Herzegovina if the Serbian Assembly agreed to them.  And at this session

23     they elected, Momcilo Krajisnik to be the president of their assembly,

24     and he was also the president of the Assembly of the Socialist Republic

25     of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  And I would point out that the members of

Page 20115

 1     this Serbian Assembly continued to attend such sessions of the regular

 2     assembly as -- as they saw fit to, and Momcilo Krajisnik continued to act

 3     as the president of that assembly as well.

 4             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 11248.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Is it 248 or 284?

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You called it 284 earlier.

 8             MS. BIBLES:  Oh, I'm sorry.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  What we have on our screen, Madam Registrar, could

10     you please repeat the 65 ter number and then assign a...

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Document on screen which is 11284 receives number

12     P3005, Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  P3005 is admitted.

14             MS. BIBLES:

15        Q.   On 9 January 1992, this assembly adopted a declaration that you

16     describe in paragraph 177 of your 2002 report as being:

17             "Final step in a gradual buildup of a separate state entity in

18     Bosnia and Herzegovina."

19             I'd like to turn to that document and ask a couple of questions?

20             MS. BIBLES:  I would ask that 65 ter 03209, the declaration on

21     the proclamation of the Republic of the Serbian people of Bosnia and

22     Herzegovina be brought to our screens.

23        Q.   Are we looking at the declaration that you described in

24     paragraph 177 here?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 20116

 1             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, now if we could go to page 2 in both

 2     B/C/S and English.

 3        Q.   We see under Article 3, the declaration states that:

 4             "Territorial delimitation with political communities of other

 5     peoples in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the solution of other

 6     mutual rights and obligations, shall be performed peacefully and

 7     consensually.  Ethnic, historical, league, cultural, economic,

 8     geographical communications, and other significant criteria will be taken

 9     into account, and the principles and rules of international law will be

10     observed."

11             The reference in Article 3 to the peaceful manner seems contrary

12     to much of the public rhetoric heard from the Bosnian Serb leadership in

13     October and November of 1991.  Is there a contextual explanation for

14     this?

15        A.   Well, at -- at this time, this time being the end of 1991,

16     beginning of 1992, while the Bosnian Serbs were establishing their --

17     their own institutions, the assembly, the end of December, we've seen the

18     foundation of the assembly at the end of December, they formed a council

19     of ministers.  And with this declaration they have stated that they were

20     going to have a separate territory within Bosnia-Herzegovina.  That's why

21     I call it the final step, although there were other steps taken after

22     this to put flesh on the bones that they had created.

23             But they were conducting negotiations with the -- the other two

24     main political parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina; that is, the HDZ, the

25     Croatian Democratic Union, and the SDA, the Party for Democratic Action

Page 20117

 1     which a party of the Bosnian Muslims.  They were negotiating with those

 2     parties with a view to the -- about the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina

 3     and its internal structure and its relationship to the -- what was still

 4     the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  And those negotiations

 5     in -- in January 1992 were about to recommence under the auspices of the

 6     European union in the person of Jose Cutileiro of Portugal.

 7             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I tender 03209.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 03209 receives P3006, Your Honours.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted.

11             MS. BIBLES:

12        Q.   And in the next paragraph of your report, paragraph 178, you list

13     several particularly important pieces of legislation from the assembly.

14     Let's first turn to the constitution of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia.

15             MS. BIBLES:  If we could have the first page of 65 ter 07187 on

16     our screens.

17        Q.   Looking at the first page, is this the constitution described in

18     your report?

19        A.   Yes, it is.

20        Q.   If we could stay on page 1 in the B/C/S -- or in the original

21     language and go to page 2 in English.

22             And looking Articles 1 and 2, it -- when we look at Article 1, we

23     see that it identifies that the Serbian republic is the state of the Serb

24     people.

25             And in Article 2 we see that it sets out territory.

Page 20118

 1             "The territory of the republic consist of Serb autonomous

 2     regions, municipalities, and other Serb ethnic entity, including the

 3     regions in which genocide was committed against the Serb people in the

 4     Second World War."

 5             Based on your research and experience in this field, did these

 6     criteria for the establishment of the Serbian state within Bosnia and

 7     Herzegovina remain constant during the war?

 8        A.   In general terms, yes.  This -- this article puts forward a --

 9     a -- some definition of -- of the territory that they wanted to include

10     within their republic as opposed to the January declaration which merely

11     stated that there would be a territory and that it would be defined in

12     negotiations with the other parties based on various criteria.  Here,

13     they're setting out what, in their view, those territories should consist

14     of.

15             I would have to mention, however, that the Autonomous Districts

16     were in fact abolished by amendment to this constitution in

17     September 1992 by which time the territories of those autonomous

18     republics had been included within the republic, but -- the republic at

19     that time in September 1992, sort of centralised, if you will, and the

20     autonomous districts themselves were abolished.  But the -- with that

21     minor exception, the -- the principle remained the same.  The Bosnian

22     Serbs want those territories which had -- which had -- had been

23     historically Serbian.

24             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 07187.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

Page 20119

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 07187 receives number P3007,

 2     Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted.

 4             MS. BIBLES:

 5        Q.   You also list the Law on National Defence as being significant.

 6             MS. BIBLES:  If we could have the first page of 65 ter 03225 on

 7     our screens.

 8        Q.   Could you tell us what date the National Defence Act was enacted?

 9        A.   It was enacted on February 28th, 1992.

10        Q.   And what was the effective date?

11        A.   It was - I think in terms of the last article of this law - it

12     was to come into effect eight days after it was published in the

13     Official Gazette, and the date of publication we say is 23 March 1992, so

14     it would have come into effect on the 31st of March, I suppose.

15        Q.   Could you put these dates into context with the other events at

16     the time?

17        A.   Yes.  I mentioned the negotiations which were going on.  They

18     were still going on at this time.  However, the -- during that period,

19     the -- the Bosnian Serb leadership continued to develop their own state

20     within Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the adoption of the constitution

21     and this law and other laws.  And while negotiations were going on in

22     March, there was much discussion in the Bosnian Serb Assembly about

23     establishing control on the ground, and this law and some of the other

24     laws were published on the 23rd of March.  While the negotiations were

25     still going on, and given the fact that it stated that they would come

Page 20120

 1     into operation, in fact, eight days after the publication, we can

 2     conclude that by the 23rd of March, before the negotiations had -- had

 3     concluded, they had already decided that they were going to activate --

 4     in fact, activate their own state institutions as of the end of March.

 5             MS. BIBLES:  If we could go to page 5 in the original language

 6     and page 2 in English.

 7        Q.   And I'll direct your attention to Articles 5 and 6.  Could you

 8     describe for us the significance of Articles 5 and 6 of this National

 9     Defence Act?

10        A.   Well, Article 5 describes the role of the National Assembly in

11     the national defence structure of the Bosnian Serb republic.  I would

12     point out the -- the portion at the end of the paragraph where it -- says

13     that the Assembly would appoint the commander of the Territorial Defence

14     of the republic in keeping with the proposals submitted by the president.

15             And article 6 deals with the -- the role of the president of the

16     republic in the Bosnian Serb -- in the -- in the defence system of the

17     Bosnian Serb republic.  And I might point out there the portions in which

18     it -- Article 6 says that the president shall supervise the Territorial

19     Defence both in peace and war-time.  I think the word "supervised" might

20     be better translated as "control."  And at the end of the paragraph, it

21     speaks about the president's relationship to the police, where it says at

22     the end of that paragraph in English:  "He shall issue orders for the

23     utilisation of the police in case of a state of war, imminent threat of

24     war, and other emergencies ..."

25        Q.   At some point in time, before the 12th of May of 1992, was an

Page 20121

 1     imminent state of war declared?

 2        A.   Yes.  The imminent threat of war was declared in -- in the -- in

 3     a decision signed by the two acting presidents of the Bosnian Serb

 4     republic on the 15th of April, 1992.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles, we have a witness who works on the basis

 6     of the original language and says that the translation he sees before him

 7     is not the one he would.

 8             Now, the witness is not a translator, but, nevertheless, since he

 9     worked from the original, would you please take care that, at least the

10     issue whether it should be "supervised" or "control" Territorial Defence

11     will be reviewed and to report what CLSS thinks about it.

12             MS. BIBLES:  Yes, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And perhaps if the witness could explain why he

14     disagrees with our official translation, we would appreciate that,

15     Mr. Treanor.

16             THE WITNESS:  I think --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it linguistically that you or is it on the basis

18     of your understanding on the role of the president that you made this

19     observation?

20             THE WITNESS:  Well, I believe the word in Serbo-Croatian is

21     "ubukovode" which comes -- is derived from the word for "hand."  It's

22     frequently translated as -- as control, manage -- or manage.  "Supervise"

23     to me means a -- a little bit more distant relationship, kind of

24     monitoring rather than actually controlling.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

Page 20122

 1             Ms. Bibles, I think it's worthwhile to submit it perhaps again to

 2     CLSS.

 3             MS. BIBLES:  I will, Your Honour, and I would tender 65 ter

 4     03225, acknowledging that we may mark it for identification pending this

 5     translation.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the number would be.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 03225 receives number P3008,

 8     Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

10                           [Trial Chamber confers]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  P3008 is marked for identification pending

12     verification of the translation of Article 6.

13             MS. BIBLES:

14        Q.   You also describe in several sections of your report the creation

15     of parallel municipal structures over which the Bosnian Serb leadership

16     gives direction.

17             I'd like to turn an example of that.  If we could go to the first

18     page of 65 ter 03228, a dispatch from the deputy minister of the

19     interior.

20             Could you tell us briefly who signed this document.

21        A.   This document is signed by Momcilo Mandic who was an assistant

22     minister for internal affairs in the Ministry of Internal affairs of the

23     Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

24        Q.   What does this document direct?

25        A.   Well, this document, which was sent out to basically all members

Page 20123

 1     of the ministry, irrespective of their ethnicity, informing them that

 2     the -- pursuant to decisions taken by the Bosnian Serb Assembly that as

 3     of the 1st of April, 1992, there would be an separate Serbian Ministry of

 4     Internal affairs.

 5        Q.   And could you tell us the importance of the manner in which this

 6     announcement was made?

 7        A.   Well, I think it's important in -- in relation to the timing,

 8     which is, I indicated, about -- in connection with the publication of the

 9     law which was published while negotiations were going on and specifying

10     that the laws would come into effect eight days later.  And this is, in

11     fact, sent out on the eighth day, I believe, or certainly thereabouts.

12     So it's in close conformity with that.

13             And this document, although perhaps it doesn't -- it doesn't look

14     that way, is a rather public step.  That is, it went to everyone --

15     everyone in the ministry irrespective of ethnicity.  So it is a

16     unilateral step taken by Bosnian Serb leaders as were the other steps

17     we've discussed.  The January declaration, the formation of the assembly,

18     and their laws, they were all -- these were all steps which were taken

19     unilaterally.  However, they were taken very publicly, and as I said,

20     this is as far as the ministry was concerned is virtually a public

21     document.  So they were very open about their intentions.

22             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honour, I tender 65 ter 03228.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 03228 receives number P3009,

25     Your Honours.

Page 20124

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted.

 2             Please proceed.

 3             MS. BIBLES:

 4        Q.   On the 12th of May, 1992, the assembly created the Army of

 5     Republika Srpska.  I'd like to show you a document with the same date and

 6     ask you to comment on the impact of the changes it brings.

 7             MS. BIBLES:  If we could see the first page of 65 ter 03261, the

 8     decision on the promulgation of amendments 1 through 4 to the

 9     constitution.

10        Q.   Could you tell us what these amendments meant for the military

11     and other armed forces.

12        A.   Yes, I'm looking at the amendments.  Basically these amendments

13     transform the Territorial Defence organisation which was mentioned in the

14     original February constitution of the Bosnian Serb republic into an army.

15     The Territorial Defence organisation was part of the -- the Yugoslav

16     defence structure and was a military force which was appropriate to the

17     various -- to the republics which were constituents of the SFRY.  The

18     Bosnian Serb republic considered itself to be a -- one of those

19     constituent parts.  In fact, technically it always considered itself to

20     be part of the -- the federal state of Yugoslavia which is specified in

21     Article 3 of their constitution I believe.

22             However, in fact, they -- they declared their independence on

23     the -- I believe it was the 6th of April, 1992, at a session of the

24     assembly, and these amendments to the constitution are -- are reflective

25     of a -- a type of military organisation more appropriate to an

Page 20125

 1     independent state rather than one that was going to be functioning as --

 2     as simply part of the -- the -- the Territorial Defence organisation

 3     of -- of the former Yugoslavia.

 4             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 03261.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 03261 receives number P3010,

 7     Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence.

 9             MS. BIBLES:

10        Q.   Before we shift our attention to the Presidency, I'd like you to

11     reflect briefly on the leadership abilities of Krajisnik in the assembly.

12        A.   Well, Momcilo Krajisnik was elected to the Assembly of the

13     Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1990 as an SDS candidate.

14     He subsequently became a member of the Main Board of the Serbian

15     Democratic Party, and as we've seen was elected president of -- of the

16     Bosnian Serb Assembly.  He seems to have been, based on the transcripts

17     of that assembly, a very strong leader.  He led the assembly sessions in

18     a very efficient manner, and he -- he -- he was a -- a leader of the

19     assembly more -- more in the American model than perhaps the British

20     model.  He was very a very political person, and he advocated certain

21     positions, and he usually got what he wanted out of the assembly.  They

22     usually adopted positions that -- that he did favour.  Not that there was

23     frequently, quite frankly, great differences of opinion within the

24     assembly.  But he was a strong leader and he got things through the

25     assembly in a very efficient manner.

Page 20126

 1        Q.   Can you comment just briefly on his relationship with

 2     Radovan Karadzic in -- in getting things through the assembly?

 3        A.   Well, Radovan Karadzic was the -- the leader -- the president of

 4     the Serbian Democratic Party, and he -- he did not occupy any official

 5     position, any government-type position either within the Socialist

 6     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina or in the Bosnian Serb republic

 7     until -- until May 1992.  So during the period when the, say, when the

 8     Bosnian Serb Assembly was formed and during its early sessions,

 9     Momcilo Krajisnik was the one that ran the sessions, and -- and moved --

10     moved the agenda forward, and he did that in -- in agreement with the --

11     with Radovan -- in political agreement with Radovan Karadzic and the --

12     as far as we know, with the rest of the Main Board of the Serbian

13     Democratic Party.  Their close co-operation in the establishment of the

14     Bosnian Serb institutions, and indeed the continuation of those

15     institutions until the end of 1995, was very important.  They formed a

16     united political front which made the Bosnian Serb leadership very strong

17     both internally and vis-ā-vis the -- the other parties in

18     Bosnia-Herzegovina, and indeed beyond the boundaries of

19     Bosnia-Herzegovina, most especially perhaps the Serbian leadership in

20     Belgrade.

21             Slobodan Milosevic, who was the president of Serbia at this time,

22     was able to use political differences, say, among the Croatian Serbs who

23     had established similar institutions of their own within Croatia.  He was

24     able to use differences between, say -- or precisely between the

25     presidents of the Croatian Serbs and the -- the leader of their assembly

Page 20127

 1     in order to, in fact, remove Milan Babic who was the early president of

 2     the -- the Croatian Serbs.

 3             So this type of political manoeuvring was not possible vis-ā-vis

 4     the Bosnian Serb leadership in view of, as I say, their strong political

 5     unity which was -- the basis of which was the close co-operation between

 6     Radovan Karadzic and Momcilo Krajisnik.

 7        Q.   Turning now to the composition of the Presidency, could you tell

 8     us who made up the Presidency as of the 12th of May, 1992?

 9        A.   On the 12th May of 1992, the constitutional law, which was passed

10     on the 28th of February, 1992, at the same time as the constitution,

11     which contained various transitional provisions, in -- in connection with

12     the implementation of that constitution was amended, and the -- the --

13     the powers of the president of the republic, which is the -- the organ

14     specified in the -- in the constitution as of the 12th of March -- 12th

15     of May, 1992, were to be exercised pursuant to the amendments of the

16     constitutional law on that date by a three-member Presidency.  The

17     assembly elected the three members to that Presidency on that date, and

18     they elected Biljana Plavsic and Nikola Koljevic, who had been the

19     Serbian members of the joint Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic

20     of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and they had been elected with SDS support.

21     And they had been the acting presidents of the Serbian republic.  And the

22     third member elected by the assembly was Dr. Radovan Karadzic.

23             So this was his first formal official high-level position in the

24     Bosnian Serb republic.  And on that date, the -- the three members of the

25     Presidency elected Radovan Karadzic to be the -- the chairman or

Page 20128

 1     president of -- of that Presidency.

 2             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I note that it is both time and a --

 3     perhaps a good location to take a break.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  It is, Ms. Bibles.

 5             Could you tell us whether you're on track as far as time is

 6     concerned.

 7             MS. BIBLES:  Very much so, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Which means that you would need how much time after

 9     the break?

10             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I believe we estimated an hour and a

11     half total.  I believe we've used 50 minutes at this point.  I will be

12     considerably less than -- than an hour and a half in total.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

14             Could -- Mr. Treanor, we'd like to take a break.  We'd like to

15     see you back in 20 minutes.  You may follow the usher.

16                           [The witness stands down]

17             JUDGE ORIE:  We will resume at ten minutes to 11.00.

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

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

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22                           [The witness takes the stand]

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles, you may proceed.

24             MS. BIBLES:  Thank you.

25        Q.   Could you describe for us the changes made to the Presidency on

Page 20129

 1     the 1st of June, 1992.

 2        A.   Well, on the 1st of June, the constitutional law that I referred

 3     to earlier was amended yet again to establish a five-member Presidency.

 4     The -- the three-member Presidency was expanded with the addition of the

 5     president of the assembly, Momcilo Krajisnik, and the prime minister

 6     Branko Djeric.

 7        Q.   Turning to some of the specifics of the powers of the Presidency,

 8     in paragraph 238 of your report, you advise that in addition to the

 9     specified powers of the Presidency, that the overwhelming SDS majority in

10     the assembly meant that the Presidency also had de facto political

11     control over the government.  Was this political situation true

12     throughout the war?

13        A.   Yes.  The SDS continued to -- to dominate the assembly.  The

14     membership of the assembly was basically stable with a few additions and

15     subtractions over the years.  But the same SDS membership was in place,

16     Radovan Karadzic remained the president of the party.  Members of the

17     party were obliged to follow party policy.  The -- the prime ministers,

18     Branko Djeric had been an SDS appointee, if you will, originally in the

19     government of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, after him the

20     prime ministers, I think they were all members of the Main Board of the

21     SDS.  So the SDS had a lock on -- on the assembly of the government and

22     the Presidency.  And of course in the person of Radovan Karadzic,

23     he himself was in a position to politically control all of those actors,

24     and he actively used his party powers to do so.

25             Later on 1994, 1995, we see in the addendum certain members of

Page 20130

 1     the assembly were expelled for breaking with SDS policy and since they

 2     had -- they were members of the SDS and had been elected as SDS

 3     representatives, they were removed from the assembly.

 4        Q.   You further explain in your report that the formal powers of the

 5     Presidency set out in Article 80 of the constitution were also frequently

 6     enhanced by the use of the emergency provision of the constitution set

 7     out in Article 81, paragraph 2.  I'd like to now focus on one of the laws

 8     passed under this provision.

 9             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, if we could see the first page of the

10     Law of the Army at 65 ter 03285.

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Kindly slow down for the interpreters.  Thank

12     you.

13             MS. BIBLES:

14        Q.   Could you briefly explain what this Law of the Army sets out?

15        A.   This law sets out the internal organisation of the Army of the

16     Serbian republic and specifies the competences and the duties of the

17     various members of the armed forces -- of the army.

18             MS. BIBLES:  And if we could turn to, I believe, it's page 2 in

19     both versions to focus on Article 10.

20        Q.   Could you read for us the powers given to the commander of the

21     Main Staff.

22        A.   Well, I'm going to read from the English for the sake of

23     simplicity, and I can read it better on the screen.  As -- Article 10:

24             "The commander of the Main Staff shall in compliance with the

25     establishment of the army and decisions of the president of the republic:

Page 20131

 1             "1, Outline the plan of conscription, replenishment, and

 2     numerical disposition of conscripts in the army --"

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Treanor, could you please read a bit more

 4     slowly.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Certainly, Your Honour.

 6             "2, Outline plans for the training and advancement of the active

 7     and reserve superior officers, the army needs.

 8             "3, Outline annual plans of education and training for the active

 9     and reserve superior officers at military academies for the needs of the

10     army.

11             "4, Ensure co-ordination of replenishment for the army.

12             "5, Inspect combat readiness of the army.

13             "6, Perform other duties falling within his competence by law

14     relevant to replenishment of the army with conscripts and registered

15     materiel."

16             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 03285.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 03285 receives number P3011,

19     Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

21             MS. BIBLES:

22        Q.   Finally, your report details the development --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles, do you have any follow-up questions on

24     this article?

25             MS. BIBLES:  I do not.  I'm sorry, we can --

Page 20132

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you assume that the Chamber was unable to read

 2     a -- Article 10?

 3             MS. BIBLES:  I merely wanted to highlight the role of the

 4     commander of the Main Staff.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  There are other ways in doing that rather than to

 6     just ask a witness to read the text, which the Chamber can read as well.

 7             MS. BIBLES:  Thank you.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  You -- please proceed.

 9             MS. BIBLES:

10        Q.   Your report details the development of the SDS as a political

11     party and how it transforms the leadership and the government of the

12     Republika Srpska.

13             I'd ask you to briefly go through some of the individuals as I

14     name them and briefly describe their role and their importance to the

15     Bosnian Serb leadership.

16             The first would be Radovan Karadzic.

17        A.   Well, Radovan Karadzic, as I mentioned earlier, was the president

18     of the Serbian Democratic Party.  He was elected president at its first

19     assembly in -- in 1990.  He continued to be president of the party until

20     the -- until the end of 1995 and beyond.  And as the leader of the party,

21     he was the dominant figure in establishing the -- the policy of the

22     party.  He had exercised certain emergency powers in that respect under

23     the statutes of the party.

24             He -- he -- was -- was -- did not occupy a position in the -- in

25     the governing structures of the Socialist Federal Republic of Bosnia and

Page 20133

 1     Herzegovina as did the -- the leaders of the other political parties,

 2     that they did occupy positions within that government.  He did not run

 3     for any office.

 4             However, as the -- the leader of the party, of the SDS, he was --

 5     played a very important role in the establishment of the separate

 6     institutions for the Bosnian Serbs, as we've seen.  We mentioned the --

 7     the regions, the assembly, the -- the republic itself, and he did come to

 8     occupy a -- a -- an informal position -- well, not informal but not a

 9     constitutional position, shortly after the -- the outbreak of the

10     conflict in early April 1992 with the establishment of the -- the

11     national -- so-called national security council of the Bosnian Serbs,

12     which was a body established by the assembly in -- on 27th of March,

13     1992.

14             He, in fact, acted as the chairman of that National Security

15     Council which operated as sort of a national-level Crisis Staff in the

16     Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Other members were minister of internal

17     affairs, for instance, minister of defence, and the two acting presidents

18     in whose names its decisions were issued.  Then on May 12 we see him

19     elected, actually elected by the assembly as a member of the Presidency.

20     This is it -- his first formal constitutional position in the republic.

21     He continued in the -- the expanded Presidency, and then on the -- I

22     believe it was the 17th of December, 1992, he was elected the single

23     president of the Bosnian Serb republic with -- along with two

24     vice-presidents, Biljana Plavsic and Nikola Koljevic.  And he continued

25     in that position until the -- the end of 1995 and beyond.

Page 20134

 1        Q.   And I'd like to next --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles, could I just revisit for a second the

 3     Law of the Army, the Law on the Army you just tendered, which was

 4     admitted.

 5             Now I see that it's a 55-page document of which I think

 6     Article 10 was read without any further questions.  As I explained

 7     before, the Chamber, if something is in evidence, takes that seriously.

 8     So, therefore, do you want us to read the remaining 54 pages and two or

 9     three articles as well and what to do with that?

10             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honour, there is a document I perhaps could

11     have tendered from the bar table.  It is a significant document with

12     respect to the army and to the trial in this case with respect to how it

13     functioned.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, my --

15             MS. BIBLES:  And that would be the purpose of introducing the

16     entire document, because we -- this is one that will be used as the trial

17     progresses.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, the trial will not progress much more as far

19     as the Prosecution's case is concerned.  And if I read that there are

20     nice chapters about applications after you finish your education, what to

21     do with compensation if are you -- is that all that we really have to pay

22     attention to it?  Or is it rather that you have certain portions of that

23     law which are specifically relevant and why not then just reduce the

24     evidence to those portions?

25             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise.  For

Page 20135

 1     the last two minutes, neither Mr. Mladic nor I have been receive any

 2     B/C/S interpretation on channel 6.  I believe there may be a technical

 3     problem.  So we weren't able to follow this part of the discussion.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's see if there's any ...

 5             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] It seems to be fine now.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Then perhaps I briefly repeat what we did over the

 7     last two minutes.

 8             After the witness had answered the last question put to him by

 9     Ms. Bibles, I inquired as to whether we needed the whole of the Law on

10     the Army into evidence, or whether Ms. Bibles could have made -- have

11     chosen excerpts of direct relevance to the case.

12             Ms. Bibles, would you give it some thought on whether you really

13     need all the -- all the chapters and paragraphs of that legislation so

14     that the Chamber and it's a staff will have to go through it, or rather

15     that you would select the most relevant portions.

16             MR. GROOME:  I'll consult with Mr. Stojanovic on that process as

17     well, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could we hear from you, well, let's say later

19     this week so that we can revisit what should be admitted or whether

20     there's a -- excerpts which could replace the entirety of the text of the

21     law.

22             MS. BIBLES:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

24             MS. BIBLES:

25        Q.   In proceeding on, could you very briefly describe the role of

Page 20136

 1     Ms. Plavsic during the war.

 2        A.   Well, Biljana Plavsic was the SDS candidate -- an SDS candidate

 3     for the Presidency of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina at

 4     the elections in -- in 1990, along with Nikola Koljevic.  I can mention

 5     him along the way, perhaps, for the sake of efficiency.

 6             They were both elected and served in that Presidency in 1991 and

 7     in that capacity advocated the positions of the Serbian Democratic Party.

 8     When the -- they -- they attended the opening session of the -- of the

 9     assembly in October and -- and later sessions, and they -- they played a

10     very important role in the establishment of the central institutions of

11     the Bosnian Serb republic but becoming its acting presidents under the

12     constitution and the constitutional law of February 1992, that was very

13     important because they had been elected to the Presidency.  Therefore,

14     like the members of the Bosnian Serb Assembly, they -- they had a -- an

15     independent legitimacy that they say had been endorsed by the voters, and

16     that lent a legitimacy to the -- to the new Bosnian Serb structures.  And

17     they both continued to be members of the Presidency throughout 1992,

18     equal members, I might add, with the other members.  The five-member

19     Presidency did establish at one of its sessions certain divisions of

20     powers among the members, certain areas that they would pay particular

21     attention to, but they were all jointly responsible for the exercising

22     the powers of the president of the republic as such.  And at the end of

23     December 1992, they were both elected vice-presidents and continued in

24     those positions until the end of 1995 and continued to support the

25     Bosnian Serb efforts, of course, and to lend their legitimacy to its

Page 20137

 1     Presidency.

 2        Q.   And, finally, how effective was the Bosnian Serb leadership in

 3     accomplishing the goal of ethnic separation within Bosnia and Herzegovina

 4     from 1991 to the end of 1995?

 5        A.   Well, I would say that the -- the Bosnian Serb leadership was --

 6     was very effective in that respect.  One of its principle goals right

 7     from the beginning of the foundation of the SDS was the exercise of -- of

 8     more direct authority by Bosnian Serb leaders, Bosnian Serb officials, in

 9     the parts of the country populated by Serbs.  This is a process that can,

10     in shorthand, be described as regionalisation, but it also included the

11     municipal level.  The -- in certain cases one has to redraw boundaries of

12     municipalities so they would be more Serbian, and then have those

13     municipalities united in regions.

14             Now, if they wanted that irrespective of whether

15     Bosnia-Herzegovina remained within Yugoslavia or not, their other main

16     goal was, of course, to keep Bosnia-Herzegovina within Yugoslavia.  To --

17     to keep -- to keep it short, they were not successful in that -- in that

18     second goal, in keeping the -- the Serbs within Bosnia and Herzegovina --

19     Bosnia-Herzegovina within Yugoslavia, but they were successful in -- in

20     effect partitioning Bosnia-Herzegovina, the establishment of their

21     independent institutions -- of their separate institutions beginning with

22     the assembly, was extremely important that process because it attracted

23     the attention of the international community to the position of the

24     Bosnian Serbs within Bosnia.

25             They -- the assembly, in letters signed by Momcilo Krajisnik,


Page 20138

 1     sent letters to the EU and international negotiators, international

 2     bodies making them aware of the desire of the Bosnian Serbs to remain

 3     within Yugoslavia and to have a their own institutions, et cetera, and

 4     the international community basically paid heed to that and negotiations

 5     in 1992 and later proceeded on the basis of having a separate Bosnian

 6     Serb entity within Bosnia-Herzegovina which was something that many

 7     people had said was impossible.  You can't partition Bosnia, and they in

 8     fact managed to do so and get the international community to recognise

 9     that.

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MS. BIBLES:  This concludes my examination, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Ms. Bibles.

13             Mr. Stojanovic, are you ready to cross-examine Mr. Treanor?

14             Mr. Treanor, you will be cross-examined by Mr. Stojanovic.

15     Mr. Stojanovic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.

16                           Cross-examination by Mr. Stojanovic:

17        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Professor.

18             First of all, I'd start with the a general question which would

19     be a lead-up to some of the documents I'll rely on.

20             In parallel with conducting your analysis of the documents

21     produced by the political leadership of the Serbian people in Bosnia and

22     Herzegovina, as well as assembly decisions of the Assembly of

23     Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as of the Serbian people in

24     Bosnia-Herzegovina, did you also analyse such documents put forth by the

25     parties' representative of the Muslim and Croat population in Bosnia and

Page 20139

 1     Herzegovina?

 2        A.   Yes, it was the responsibility of my team to analyse the -- the

 3     structures of all the parties to the conflict in the former Yugoslavia.

 4     And we did so.  My particular personal area of -- of expertise right from

 5     the beginning of my employ at ICTY was in fact the Bosnian Serbs.  But

 6     I -- I personally did also do -- do some work in relation to the -- the

 7     other parties, and members of my team were assigned to -- to work on all

 8     of those parties and, in many cases, we produced reports similar to the

 9     ones under consideration today.

10        Q.   While applying your analytical and methodological approach to the

11     issue you dealt with, did you try to establish any chronological

12     causality between the decisions of the political and assembly leadership

13     of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina with the decisions issued by the

14     political and assembly leadership of the Serbian people in

15     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

16        A.   Well, I think we certainly established the chronology of those

17     decisions.  I -- I wouldn't perhaps use the word "causality" as something

18     which I brought -- would have brought out as being to a certain extent

19     speculative.

20        Q.   I will actually ask you as one of my main points:  In the

21     decisions produced by the two leaderships, is there a cause and effect

22     principle in place or examples of inviting the issue of certain

23     decisions, or did your analysis prove that there wasn't any such

24     connection?

25        A.   Well, I'm not sure what you mean by two leaderships.  There were,

Page 20140

 1     generally speaking, three leaderships:  Serbian, Muslim, and Croatian.

 2             They all had -- they had different aspirations which was --

 3     therein lies the problem.  So they all sort of fed off of each other to a

 4     certain extent, but they -- they -- they had their -- their own

 5     aspirations -- and -- and those aspirations were to a greater or lesser

 6     extent shared by other actors in the Yugoslav region; namely, in Croatia

 7     and in the -- what was left of the -- what became the FRY.

 8             Well, let me just leave it at that.

 9        Q.   Professor, in your view and according to your analysis, up to

10     what moment in time did Bosnia-Herzegovina remain, de facto and de jure,

11     as part of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

12        A.   Well, I -- I think maybe I can deal with the de facto part better

13     than de jure part, not being a legal expert.  But it -- it -- it would

14     seem to me that certainly by the -- the fall of -- of 1991, that Bosnia

15     and Herzegovina was -- was basically acting as a -- a separate entity

16     from the -- from the Federation.  And, indeed, it -- it was being treated

17     on -- on a different -- on a separate basis by the international

18     community; that is, they organised connections with Bosnia in particular,

19     et cetera, et cetera.

20        Q.   In your analysis, did you deal with the issue of the

21     constitutional and legal regulation of the status of Bosnia-Herzegovina

22     as a constituent part of the SFRY, as well as the constitutional path, so

23     to speak, taken by Bosnia-Herzegovina?

24        A.   Well, I've looked at those issues, certainly, and I have produced

25     other reports as well.  I'm not -- in which those issues perhaps are

Page 20141

 1     better -- better reflected than -- than they are in -- in these two

 2     reports, which deal with -- mostly with the internal structures of the

 3     Bosnian Serb republic.

 4        Q.   Now, let's jointly take a look at a document.  That would be the

 5     constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia dated 25th

 6     of February, 1974.

 7             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have 65 ter

 8     document 07482.  B/C/S page 7; English page 18, please.

 9        Q.   While we're waiting for the document to be shown, Professor, as

10     per the constitution of the SFRY, did the sovereignty derive from

11     territory or from peoples?

12        A.   Well, again, I'm not a constitutional expert, and -- and I

13     would -- could only point to certain articles in the constitution and

14     what they say.  And if you'd like to direct me to that, I'd be pleased.

15     But I -- I generally speak and write on the basis of particular documents

16     and not by -- not by -- by memory.  I think that -- you know, we got to

17     get to look at relevant articles.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, if you want the witness to further

19     look at relevant articles of the constitution of the SFRY --

20             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  -- would you please keep in mind that the witness

22     now twice said that he is not a legal expert.  And would you also not

23     forget that the core of this case is not about who was right or wrong in

24     seeking independence or to stay within the federal system but that this

25     case is -- the core of the case is elsewhere.  Would you please keep that

Page 20142

 1     in mind.

 2             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  I'll try to

 3     keep this as brief as possible.  But it seems to me that this expertise

 4     is part and parcel of an analysis of constitutional matters.

 5        Q.   Please, Professor, Article 3, could you please take a look at it.

 6     This is the constitution of the then-SFRY.  It says here:

 7             "The socialist republics, including Bosnia-Herzegovina, are

 8     states based on the sovereignty of the people and the power of and

 9     self-management by the working class and all working people and are

10     socialist self-managing democratic communities of the working people and

11     citizens and of nations and nationalities having equal rights."

12             Would this jog your memory as to whether or not the sovereignty

13     of the republics is based on the sovereignty of the peoples living in

14     those republics or not?

15        A.   That's what the article says in general terms.  I'm sorry, which

16     constitution is this?  Is this the constitution of the SFRY?

17             JUDGE ORIE:  This was introduced by Mr. Stojanovic as the

18     constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, 25th of

19     February, 1974.

20             THE WITNESS:  Okay.  Well, my question relates to the fact that

21     Article 3, in fact, says the socialist republic or a socialist republic

22     is a state.  The plural is not used.  So I'm not sure what -- what the --

23     the reference is to when it says "socialist republic."

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we may have a translation issue here because

25     the English says:  "The socialist republics are states based upon ...,"

Page 20143

 1     and you say in the original text is singular Mr. Treanor?

 2             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  And of course they don't have articles in

 3     Serbo-Croatian, so the -- if the reference is in fact a general one to

 4     all the socialist republics of the federation, then its translation in

 5     the plural would be appropriate.  But again, I didn't -- I lost sight of

 6     which constitution this was and I saw in the singular there, whereas it's

 7     in the plural in the English.

 8             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   But the crux of the matter is this.  This is the SFRY

10     constitution.  This is the provision of Article 3 of that constitution.

11     And my question is deriving from this constitutional definition, and we

12     are going to deal with the constitution of the Socialist Republic of

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina later, is it correct what I put forward, is that each

14     republic within the SFRY was a state based on the sovereignty of the

15     people living in it?  Yes or no.

16        A.   Yes, in general terms, that's correct.  Again, there's some

17     linguistic problems here in -- in -- Serbo-Croatian in writing it --

18     the -- the genitive singular and the genitive plural are the same.  So

19     is -- just on the face of it, it's difficult to say whether it's based on

20     the sovereignty of the "people" or the "peoples," meaning to say, the

21     Serbian people, the Muslim people, the Croatian people.

22        Q.   Thank you.  We can specify that by perusing the constitution of

23     the BH.  But I think I got your answer.  Let's now focus on Article 5 of

24     the then-constitution of the SFRY.  And to ask me -- ask you whether you

25     will agree with me that in practical terms as early as in 1991, there was

Page 20144

 1     no possibility of changing the territories of the Socialist Federal

 2     Republic of Yugoslavia without applying the procedure that has been laid

 3     down in that constitution?

 4        A.   Well, if -- if you're telling me the constitution lay down a

 5     procedure, I would have to agree with that.

 6        Q.   Let's take a look at paragraph 2, Article 5, of the constitution

 7     of the SFRY.  When it comes to procedures, it states, inter alia:

 8             "The territory of a republic cannot be changed without the

 9     consent of that republic and the territory of an autonomous province

10     cannot be changed without the consent of that autonomous province.

11     Furthermore, borders of the SFRY cannot be changed without the consent of

12     all republics and autonomous provinces."

13             My question to you is:  Could you please tell me whether this

14     provision of Article 5 of the constitution of the SFRY was valid with

15     respect to all republics of the SFRY in 1991?

16        A.   Well, I'm certainly under the impression that -- that -- that

17     this remained in force, technically.  However, there have been certain

18     developments which -- on the ground which subverted it, in fact.

19        Q.   That's correct, Professor.  And this is why we are here.  Now

20     let's take a look at 65 ter document 17211.  17211.  That's the

21     constitution of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Could we

22     please focus on Articles 1, 2, and 3.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we do so, and perhaps it should be on our

24     screens, what do you want to do with the 1974 constitution, which

25     you [Overlapping speakers] ...

Page 20145

 1             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we prepared to

 2     tender it into evidence because we prepared only the relevant sections.

 3     But I'm going to revisit Article 5 later on and then propose for it to be

 4     tendered.  If you'd like it tendered it right now, then I will be guided

 5     by your will.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  As a matter of fact, it would be appreciated in

 7     you would make excerpt -- if you would select the relevant portions of it

 8     so that we don't have to study by heart the 129 pages uploaded.

 9             And I also would appreciate there was some issue about whether --

10     what constitution this was, how it was translated.  I see that it was

11     uploaded from apparently a book called the constitution of the --

12     constitutions of the countries of the world.  Now, whether this is the

13     1974 constitution, yes or no, seems not to appear clearly from the text

14     you have uploaded, so why not take official texts, if they are available

15     in translation as well, and look at the translation issues, as well,

16     before you seek portions or excerpts to be admitted.

17             We leave it, at this moment, as it is.

18             Please proceed.

19             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Fine.

20        Q.   Let's take a look at items 1, 2, and 3 of the constitution of the

21     Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

22             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please ...

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, we earlier were struggling with the

24     English translation of the 1974 constitution.  The resolution of such

25     problems, however, is not to present no translation at all because, I do

Page 20146

 1     understand, that English is not uploaded into e-court.

 2             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as far as I could

 3     see, and as far as we were given from the -- by the Prosecution, this

 4     would be that document, and this is the official translation that we

 5     received from the Prosecution.  If this is a problem, we will sort it

 6     out.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  What we have in e-court is English ERN numbers, but

 8     Madam Registrar tells me that the English version, it may well exist, but

 9     was not uploaded into e-court.

10                           [Trial Chamber confers]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And the document we have on our screen at this

12     moment is in B/C/S.  Or we have -- well, first of all, the documents, on

13     the second page gives us a lot of handwriting in numbers.  And all I see

14     after that, there -- and also the last page of the document, page 288, is

15     full with nicely written calculations, and I do not see any English text

16     anywhere.  I see nice indexes to it.  If you want to us pay attention to

17     a constitution, then upload it in two languages and without all kind of

18     irrelevant additions.

19             Or do you really want us to read through 30 or 40 pages of

20     indexes?

21             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours.  If you wish

22     me to circumvent this issue, I can try to do so, try to extract myself

23     from this situation by putting certain questions to the witness without

24     dealing with legal text.

25        Q.   Professor, would you say that I'm right when I say that the

Page 20147

 1     constitution of SFRY BiH, which was in effect in 1991, it was in force

 2     then, guaranteed the equality of peoples and nationalities of the peoples

 3     in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 4        A.   I believe that's correct in general terms.

 5        Q.   Would you say I'm right when I said that the Serbs, Croats, and

 6     the Muslim, as well as members of other peoples and nationalities in

 7     Bosnia-Herzegovina were those who constituted the constituent nations and

 8     peoples of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Now let's take a look, please,

12     at 65 ter 15207.

13             That would be an amendment, amendment 69 to the constitution of

14     the Bosnia-Herzegovina constitution.

15        Q.   You dealt with it in your report yourself, dated 31st of July,

16     1990.  And ow let's take a look --

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Stojanovic, before you go to that, can we just

18     check something here.  If you look at page 41, line 5, you are

19     transcribed as referring to the constitution of the SFRY BiH.  I thought

20     you were referring to the constitution of the BiH; is that correct?

21             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That's correct.  That's correct,

22     Your Honour.  Thank you.  Not SFRY but Socialist Republic of

23     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Thank you for your kind assistance.

24             For the benefit of the transcript, page 41, line 5, not

25     "constitution of the SFRY" but "SRBiH."  With your permission, I would

Page 20148

 1     like to ask the professor as follows.

 2        Q.   Let's take a look at this amendment --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, could you also assist us in taking

 4     us to the relevant paragraph in the report, of which we do not even know

 5     which one, but so that we know what portion of the report you referred to

 6     when you said the witness dealt with this constitution.

 7             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may, Your Honours, I'll try

 8     to find that footnote.  It presently eludes me, but I will get back to

 9     you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it you want to ask questions in that context.

11     So, therefore, for us to follow the evidence, it would be extremely

12     helpful to know where to look in the report.  We even could consider to

13     take the break five minutes early so that you could find it and then

14     enable the Chamber to follow the evidence.

15             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just a second or

16     two, that would be ... well, Professor dealt with the amendments in -- in

17     paragraph 252, which concerns certain amendments to the constitution of

18     the Republika Srpska.  And later on, let me find reference to the

19     amendments.

20        Q.   If I can't, then I would ask the Professor whether you dealt with

21     amendments to the constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina dated 1990 that we

22     have on our screens here?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Which report, Mr. Stojanovic?

24             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] The -- P3003.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Is that the first report or the -- first report.

Page 20149

 1     And you refer us to paragraph 252, where I have some problems in --

 2     because I wonder whether it contains a paragraph 252 at all.

 3             Because, as far as I'm aware of, paragraph 178 is the last one.

 4     Or are you referring to footnote 252?  We could then look for that.

 5             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, I'm referring to

 6     paragraph 252 of the report, which now bears the indication P3003, if I

 7     noted it down correctly.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me see whether I have the -- yes.  I am -- I

 9     made a mistake, Mr. Stojanovic.  I looked at the addendum rather than to

10     the original report.  Apologies for that.

11             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] If you allow me, Your Honours,

12     I'm going to ask questions.  This does not refer to this amendment but

13     others, and this is why I sought your leave to ask the professor --

14        Q.   -- whether he'd encountered this amendment which we see on our

15     screens?

16        A.   Well, I am familiar with this amendment, yes.  I don't know where

17     it may be mentioned in -- in the report.

18        Q.   Not in this part.  And this is why I wanted us to focus on this

19     portion.  We have it in the e-court system.  Let's take a look at

20     paragraph 2, item 2.

21             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That will be the last

22     paragraph of the English version, Your Honours.  That's 65 ter 15207.

23     1-5-2-0-7.

24        Q.   It states, Professor, let me remind you, 31st of July, 1990.

25             [As read] "It is prohibited to organise political activities

Page 20150

 1     geared towards change of the constitutional legal order to jeopardize

 2     territorial integrity and independence of the Socialist Federative

 3     Republic of Yugoslavia, all the sovereignty and territorial integrity of

 4     the Socialist Federal Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina."

 5             Would you agree if I said that this constitutional amendment

 6     adopted on the 31st of July, 1990, it explicitly forbids, prohibits

 7     political activities against territorial integrity of the SFRY as a

 8     country?

 9        A.   That's what it says.

10        Q.   I would like to focus your attention to the chronology of events.

11     Let's retrieve from the e-court Exhibit P303, P303, paragraph 56, where

12     you state, Professor --

13             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Is it possible that you misspoke?  Instead of

14     P303 it should be P3003.

15             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] P3003.  I apologise to the

16     interpreters.  I speak too fast.  So that would be P3003 at paragraph 56.

17             Thank you very much, Your Honour.

18        Q.   Here, you state, Professor, in such context of events - that

19     would be paragraph 56, second sentence:

20             [As read] "Following a controversial session of the SRBiH

21     Assembly on the 14th and 15th of October, on expanded meeting of the SDS

22     party council - in fact, the political council - was held on the 15th of

23     October.  It was attended, inter alia, by Karadzic as president of the

24     SDS, Serbian members of the Presidency and government of SRBiH, and

25     members of the Executive Board ... Bosnian Serb leaders present -

Page 20151

 1     prominent among them Karadzic, Krajisnik, Plavsic, and Koljevic reacted

 2     strongly to the SRBiH Assembly's vote for Bosnian sovereignty ..."

 3             My question to you, Professor, is this:  Why did you qualify that

 4     assembly as controversial?

 5        A.   Well, because the -- the decisions taken there were -- as we've

 6     seen in some of the articles of the -- the constitution of the SFRY, that

 7     you've enumerated and indeed the constitution of the SRBiH decisions

 8     which were -- could be viewed as in contravention with that, and of

 9     course the decisions were strongly opposed by especially the Serbian

10     members of the assembly.  The decisions were not a total surprise,

11     however, to -- to anybody.  There had been much discussion of the whole

12     issue of the -- the future of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the -- in the weeks

13     preceding, especially after the declaration of independence of Slovenia

14     and Croatia.  And I believe drafts of this -- of these -- of the two

15     controversial decisions had been circulated previously.  So they knew

16     what was in the offing, but of course when it happened, then they -- the

17     Bosnian Serbs were ready to react.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, I'm looking at the clock.  It's time

19     for a break.

20             It wasn't entirely clear to me with the last question whether you

21     wanted to challenge what the witness wrote, that is to say, that the

22     Defence takes issue with this is controversial or do you think it's not

23     controversial, and whether there is any disagreement about it?

24             Is it your position -- is it the Defence's position that it was

25     not controversial, Mr. Stojanovic?

Page 20152

 1             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, it's not, Your Honour.  This

 2     could be a semantic issue, whether it's controversial or not.  But the

 3     gist Defence is the reply we received; to wit, decision of that session

 4     of the assembly contravened both constitution of the SRBiH and SFRY, and

 5     later on we are going do deal with the nature of those decisions, whether

 6     they are controversial or contravening the interests of a constituent

 7     nation is what you, history, and everybody living in Bosnia-Herzegovina

 8     will have to take a decision on.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps you should further explore that, because I

10     did not hear the witness say that a decision contravened both

11     constitution of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the

12     SFRY.  I didn't hear but perhaps I missed something, Mr. Treanor.

13             THE WITNESS:  I believe I did say, Your Honour, that the -- the

14     decisions taken at that session could be viewed as contravening both of

15     those constitutions.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's the controversy, controversy --

17             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  -- is it?

19             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  But -- or did you express as your opinion that they

21     were -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

22             THE WITNESS:  Well, I'm hesitant to may -- advance any legal

23     opinion, but they certainly were viewed --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No, that's my -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

25             THE WITNESS:  -- by political actors at the time and among the

Page 20153

 1     general people as -- in -- possibly in contravention of those two

 2     constitutions.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm not trying to elicit from you a legal

 4     opinion on the matter.

 5             We take a break, and we'll resume after the witness has left the

 6     courtroom.  We'll then take a break of 20 minutes and resume at 20

 7     minutes past 12.00.

 8                           [The witness stands down]

 9                           --- Recess taken at 11.58 a.m.

10                           --- On resuming at 12.21 p.m.

11                           [The witness takes the stand]

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

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

14        Q.   Professor, if you remember, we were dealing with the decisions of

15     the Assembly of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina dated the 13th,

16     14, and 15th October 1991.

17             Kindly tell us which specific moves were made at the time due to

18     which you said were made following the proclamation of sovereignty?

19     Which documents were issued?

20        A.   By the SDS?

21        Q.   I meant, Professor, by the Assembly of the Republic of Bosnia and

22     Herzegovina which was objected to by the Serb deputies.

23        A.   Okay.  There were two documents in particular.  They -- one is

24     referred to as the letter; and the other is referred to, I think, is the

25     declaration.  Basically - and I say "basically" meaning in a summary

Page 20154

 1     fashion - said that the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was

 2     going to act independently in its own interests from -- from there on in,

 3     which was -- almost a declaration of independence.

 4        Q.   Do you know that, following this decision by the Assembly of

 5     Bosnia and Herzegovina, the government of the Socialist Republic of

 6     Bosnia issued its decision which states that soldiers from Bosnia and

 7     Herzegovina should no longer be sent to serve their military term with

 8     the JNA?

 9        A.   Yes, I believe that's correct.

10        Q.   The Serb deputies, dissatisfied with this outvoting, did they

11     actually walk out of the assembly session on the 13th, 14th, and 15th of

12     October, 1991?

13        A.   Yes, there was a walkout.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Is there any dispute about this?

15             Ms. Bibles, I see you're nodding no.

16             Mr. Stojanovic, if there's no dispute about it, why deal with the

17     matter?

18             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Then I'll move on, Your Honour.

19     Thank you.

20        Q.   Professor, are you familiar with the date when the Deputies Club

21     meeting with held - Serbian Deputies Club meeting - was held when the

22     decision was made to establish the Assembly of the Serbian people of

23     Bosnia and Herzegovina?

24        A.   That was -- the meeting we discussed in my previous testimony.

25     That was the 24th of October.

Page 20155

 1             Let me just as to the -- the answer to my previous question.

 2     What technically happened at that session of the Assembly of the Serbian

 3     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was that Momcilo Krajisnik, who was

 4     the presiding officer as the president of the assembly, adjourned the

 5     session because he as the other Serbian deputies were against having

 6     those two documents adopted, and they then left.  And the -- but the

 7     deputy president of the assembly reconvened the session, and that

 8     reconvened session passed the documents.  So whether you want to call it

 9     a walkout or not is a semantic question.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Professor, can I ask a question.  You said when

11     you elaborate now -- this is at page 48, line 24.  You said the assembly

12     of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina?  Was that the assembly

13     or was it the assembly of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

14             THE WITNESS:  This is a page of the report?

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Look at paragraph 48 [sic] on the screen, line 24.

16     Start at line 23.  You say:  "The Assembly of the Serbian Republic of

17     Bosnia and Herzegovina ..."

18             THE WITNESS:  I'm not seeing paragraph 48 on the screen.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It's not a paragraph.  It's the transcript

20     of [Overlapping speakers] --

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Page, page, the transcript on the -- page 48 of

22     the --

23             THE WITNESS:  Oh, okay.  I see the page numbers now, Your Honour.

24     I wasn't familiar with it.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I beg your pardon.  My mistake.

Page 20156

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yes, okay.  Page 48, line ...

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  24.  Start from line 22.

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I did say --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  If you could --

 5             THE WITNESS:  -- [Overlapping speakers] ... the assembly of the

 6     Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 8             THE WITNESS:  The socialist republic, yes, that's correct.  Thank

 9     you, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Not the Serbian.

11             THE WITNESS:  No.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  No.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  We just made it to have it still on the screen so

14     that you could read it.

15             Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

16             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17        Q.   Would it be correct to conclude, Professor, that the Deputies

18     Club meeting, Serb Deputies Club meeting, which preceded the decision to

19     establish the Serbian Assembly, was actually a response to what had been

20     issued on the 15th of October that year, that is to say, a week earlier,

21     by the non-Serb deputies in the Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

22        A.   Well, that -- that's a very complex issue, I think.  I mean, on

23     one level, yes, you could say that -- that that was the response.

24     However, these events did not develop simply on the surface.  Things

25     happened one day and then people react the next day because of what

Page 20157

 1     happened the day before.  The -- as I indicated earlier, the -- the

 2     various political parties had their -- had their own goals.  Everyone

 3     knew everyone else's positions on the various matters of the day.  And

 4     they were all able to -- to try lay various plans.

 5             I think on one occasion Radovan Karadzic said that they had their

 6     plans laid out nine steps ahead or something like that.  So they knew --

 7     the Serbian leadership, Bosnian Serb leadership knew that this was going

 8     to happen, and they thought about they were going to do and in terms of

 9     what they wanted to do anyways.  And this -- the -- the actual adoption

10     of these documents gave them a -- a very good opportunity to -- to do

11     something that they would have done in any case, absent -- absent the

12     agreement of the other political parties to perhaps curtail their

13     objectives and to move in a direction more acceptable to -- to the

14     Bosnian Serbs.  Just very shortly before the adoption of -- of these

15     documents, there had been negotiations with -- between Radovan Karadzic

16     and Alija Izetbegovic, the head of the SDA, who was also a member of

17     the -- the -- the Presidency.  In fact, he was the president of the

18     Presidency of the -- of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

19             In -- Radovan Karadzic thought that Izetbegovic had come around,

20     in fact, to accepting the idea of regionalisation of Bosnia, and he was

21     very euphoric about that because that seemed to be an indication that

22     negotiations were -- were heading in a favourable direction.  But the --

23     and the final adoption of these documents showed that that was not in

24     fact the case, and things were not going the way that the Bosnian Serbs

25     wanted them to go but rather were back on the old track, if I can put

Page 20158

 1     that way.  And so that they moved ahead in a fashion, again, which I

 2     think they had decided they were going to do in any case much earlier.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, if you would put focused questions

 4     to the witness, then -- then we might get a bit shorter answers because

 5     the witness is almost unable to understand what exactly he is supposed to

 6     respond.

 7             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] The witness actually provided

 8     his answer in the very first sentence, and then it was my impression that

 9     he felt the need to expand.

10        Q.   In any case, Professor, can you tell us if you know when Croatia

11     made its decision to secede from the SFRY and when did it declare its

12     independence?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Any dispute about this Mr. Stojanovic?  Apparently

14     not.  Let's not waste or time --

15             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no dispute, I will

16     use that as a lead up to my next question.

17        Q.   On 8 October 1991, that is to say, a week prior to, as you put

18     it, the controversial assembly session of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia

19     decided to go its own way.  The question is as follows.  Did that

20     decision of the neighbouring republic, which was still party to the SFRY,

21     also have something to do with the decision made by the

22     Bosnia-Herzegovina assembly to declare its independence?

23        A.   I would think so, yes.

24        Q.   Would you agree with me that no one, according to the

25     then-constitution of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, could

Page 20159

 1     simply lead a people out of that republic without -- or against its will?

 2     Can they simply be excluded, so to say?

 3        A.   I -- I -- I don't know what the mechanism would have been

 4     according -- by which the -- the peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the

 5     ones that were recognised in the constitution, as I think we've seen,

 6     could -- could have, under that constitution and in accordance with that

 7     constitution, expressed their -- their will.  The -- the assembly of the

 8     republic, which was the highest body in the republic, the assembly

 9     elected the government, so the assembly was the -- the main embodiment of

10     the sovereignty of the people or the peoples of the republic, was

11     composed of members who were elected from various constituencies and they

12     were not elected by nationality.  They were not elected as

13     representatives of particular -- of a particular people.  They were

14     elected as individuals.  They were elected as -- as candidates of

15     political parties, to be sure.  There was an amendment to the

16     constitution of the Socialist Republic that provided for the foundation

17     or the creation of a -- I believe they refer to it as a council of

18     nationalities which would have provided a -- a certain mechanism in -- in

19     the political arena for the expression of the will of nationality -- of

20     peoples per se, as people, as Serbs, Croats, and Muslims; however,

21     that -- that council was in fact never created.  So there -- there really

22     wasn't a mechanism by which the -- any people -- any one people or all of

23     them could have expressed their -- their political will as peoples to do

24     anything of the sort that are you describing.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, I understand the answer.  I do not

Page 20160

 1     fully understand the question, to be quite honest:

 2             No one, according to the then-constitution, could simply lead a

 3     people out of that republic, I do understand the Socialist Republic of

 4     Bosnia-Herzegovina, without or against its will.  Can they simply be

 5     excluded.

 6             Now, it seems to me that you have some situation on your mind.

 7     Could you be concrete and tell us to whom you referred when you said "no

 8     one," apparently have you on your mind that someone tried to, and then

 9     which people was led out of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and

10     Herzegovina.

11             It's -- could -- could you be concrete so that I know.  If you

12     say could the Serbs do this or could the Muslims do that or could a party

13     do that or could a parliament in incomplete composition do something?

14     That's all language I understand.  This is totally foreign to me.

15             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my question was

16     this:  Could they be taken out of the SFRY?  But given the professor's

17     answer, I'd like to go back to my original question.

18             Let me try to be direct and more specific.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  That changes the question completely.

20     We're dealing with a totally different question.  But it still doesn't

21     make it concrete.

22             Do you lead a people out of the SFRY; or do you lead a

23     constituent republic out of the SFRY?  And who did it?  That is all --

24     you need concrete starting points for your question.

25             And when the witness started answering, you should have thought

Page 20161

 1     about whether -- either you misspoke or you were mistranslated.

 2             Please proceed.

 3             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Professor, I'll try to be as direct as possible.

 5             The decision made by the Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina,

 6     dated the 15th of October, 1995, does it directly contravene Article 5 of

 7     the constitution of the SFRY?  You have had occasion to see it at the

 8     very beginning of the cross-examination.

 9        A.   Well, again, without venturing a legal opinion, I would say that

10     it was certainly viewed that way by many people at that time.  Especially

11     many Serbs.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  That was the controversy?

13             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

15             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   The next question, Professor.  Having in mind the provision of

17     Article 3 of the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, did the Assembly

18     of Bosnia-Herzegovina -- could, it, the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina

19     make that decision against the will of one constituent people?  The

20     people in question being the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

21        A.   Well, that was the thrust of the answer I gave before, is there

22     was no mechanism actually in operation by which the peoples could express

23     their will as peoples.  It was -- it was simply a vote in the assembly as

24     members of the assembly.  They voted.  It was a majority.  And it was

25     passed.

Page 20162

 1        Q.   Let's deal with that issue then.

 2             Do you know, Professor, whether it was by that time that Europe

 3     had established the Venice Commission which was supposed to deal with

 4     such legal matters in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 5        A.   Yes, I'm familiar with that.

 6        Q.   Did you know that a so-called Badinter commission did have a

 7     position regarding this very issue concerning the decision made by the

 8     Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina?  If you're aware of their position,

 9     do share it with us; if not, just say so, please.

10        A.   Yes, I'm aware of that.  They were issued a number of decisions.

11     I can't remember the numbers.  They are usually referred to as number 1,

12     number 2, and that sort of thing.  The decisions you're referring to I

13     believe were in January 1992, by which time there had been application by

14     the government of the Socialist Republic to the EU or the commission for

15     recognition.  However, as I indicated in my earlier testimony, the

16     Bosnian Serb Assembly had been very active in bringing its point of view

17     before the -- the European authorities so that they were aware of the

18     fact that these steps were controversial inside Bosnia-Herzegovina.  And

19     the -- the Badinter commission basically requested that further steps be

20     taken to confirm the will of the people in -- in Bosnia and Herzegovina

21     to be independent.  In other words, that they didn't want to simply

22     accept the decision of -- of the -- the government who had sent them

23     their application in December, or even the earlier decision of the

24     assembly, which was not technically the same thing.  But -- or

25     the independently conducted referendum that the Bosnian Serbs did hold in

Page 20163

 1     November on this very issue in which they overwhelmingly voted to remain

 2     within Yugoslavia.  A referendum which was not part of the constitutional

 3     procedure, and the Badinter commission said that -- the -- among the

 4     steps that they would like to see would be another referendum in Bosnia

 5     and Herzegovina, a general referendum on that question.  And that that

 6     referendum was in fact held.

 7             So the -- just to perhaps wrap that up with this idea of peoples,

 8     that referendum that was held was -- was a general referendum and it was

 9     designed that way.  It was not held by peoples.  The -- most -- the SDS

10     leadership encouraged Serbs not to vote in that referendum because they

11     had already had their own referendum.  However, the European authorities

12     accepted the results of that referendum as a valuable expression.

13        Q.   Professor, I will ask you about that.  Thank you.  Let me just

14     continue my line of questioning.  Do not hold it against me for

15     interrupting you, but we will get to the topic.

16             Please briefly direct your attention at paragraph 171 of your

17     report; P3003.  Because have you mentioned just that, the referendum, as

18     you called it, held by the Serbian people.  There, you say --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Treanor, are you invited to stay a little bit

20     further away from the microphone.

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.

22             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   So, paragraph 171.

24             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we just wait

25     for a moment until we get the B/C/S version on the screen.

Page 20164

 1        Q.   There, you say that a decision was made on 18 October 1991 at the

 2     Deputies Club meeting to hold a plebiscite of the Serb people, which

 3     would confirm the decisions made at the assembly session of the Serb

 4     people, the constituent assembly session, on the 24th of October with

 5     regard to remaining in Yugoslavia.

 6             The plebiscite was, indeed, held on 9 and 10 October, 1991.  And

 7     let me ask you this, and you can see it in your footnote, specifically,

 8     and I believe we will be able to agree.  It was not the referendum.  Its

 9     title was plebiscite.  Do you see any difference in terms of status

10     between the two institutes in the sense of the weight to be attached to

11     the decision made by the certain people in Bosnia-Herzegovina as a result

12     of it?

13        A.   They certainly did call it a plebiscite.  I -- I think there was

14     a technical difference between a plebiscite and a referendum.  I'm not

15     sure what it is.  I could speculate.  I'm sure that the lawyers in the

16     room would have a better idea about that.  But they certainly did call it

17     a plebiscite.

18        Q.   Could you please tell the Court, according to your information,

19     what was the result, the outcome of the plebiscite with respect to the

20     decision of the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina to remain living in

21     this Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

22        A.   Yes, that's what the relevant paragraph says.

23        Q.   And tell me, Professor, let me go back to what we discussed

24     earlier.  Did the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina, taking into account the

25     suggestions of the Badinter commission, take a decision on-calling a

Page 20165

 1     referendum in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  And it took place on the 29th of February and the

 4     1st of March, 1992; is that correct?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Now, Your Honours, let's

 7     retrieve from e-court 65 ter document 1D01478.

 8             Let's focus on the following page in the English version.  The

 9     amendment 62 where the authorities of the Socialist Republic of

10     Bosnia-Herzegovina by way of amendment 62 state:

11             [As read] "The territory of the Socialist Republic of

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina is integral and indivisible.  The borders of the

13     republic may be changed by a decision of the Assembly of the Bosnia and

14     Herzegovina Republic only in keeping with the will of the peoples of

15     Bosnia-Herzegovina on the basis of a previous expression of their will by

16     way of a referendum if at least two-thirds of the total number of voters

17     should vote in favour of changing the borders."

18             My question to you, Professor, is:  Did the constitution and this

19     constitutional amendment foresee any way of changing the borders within

20     Bosnia-Herzegovina against the will of two-thirds of the people living in

21     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

22        A.   I'm just seeing the amendment now.  It wasn't on the screen

23     before.  And that's what it says, yes.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If I may just interject.  We heard a few minutes

25     ago that this was called a plebiscite and not a referendum, and that

Page 20166

 1     article, that amendment now refers to participation in a referendum.

 2     Does that make any difference?

 3             THE WITNESS:  Is that a question for me, Your Honour?

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Indeed.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Well, yes.  The -- in -- in terms of this -- of

 6     this amendment, and perhaps general terminology the Serbian plebiscite

 7     would not have qualified under this amendment.  It was something, as I

 8     think I indicated, was carried out -- outside the framework of the

 9     constitution.  Not to say that it wasn't a valid expression of the will

10     of most Serbs.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, Mr. Stojanovic, it seems that in ordinary

12     language, not in a technical sense, a plebiscite and a referendum are

13     often considered to be the same.  Whereas, sometimes in the various

14     constitutional systems there may be difference.

15             Now, you raised the issue of a different effect from plebiscite

16     to referendum.  Would you be -- would you tell us what exactly, when

17     raising this issue, what you, in the language you're using now, what you

18     consider to be the difference between the two?

19             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I personally, not

20     dealing with semantics, would say that the goal and the meaning of both

21     decisions was the same, and that is the peoples' expression of their will

22     on certain political and legal issues and thereby gathering support for a

23     certain political decision.

24             In this particular case, Defence holds that the referendum

25     entitled "A Plebiscite," semantically plebiscite has a wider scope than

Page 20167

 1     referendum because plebiscite means the expression of all and the

 2     referendum is something which provides a certain answer to a question.

 3     Was entitled "A Plebiscite" because of the current political needs that

 4     dictated and informed the decisions of both assemblies.  Both the

 5     Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Assembly of the Serbian people in

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  I think this what I wanted to elicit from the

 7     professor as a reply, that there was reason behind the decision of the

 8     9th and 10th of October that bore the title "plebiscite."

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, I'm going to interrupt you.  I'm

10     still puzzled by the beginning of what you said.  Defence holds that the

11     referendum entitled "A Plebiscite," semantically has a wider scope

12     because a plebiscite refers to all and a referendum is something which

13     provides a certain answer to a question which are two totally

14     incomparable matters.  It is like saying a market-place is where many

15     people gather and where vegetables are sold is a market-place.  I mean,

16     the one is about the question, and the other one is about who are

17     consulted on that question.

18             So, therefore, you're at least confusing me.  It may be that I'm

19     not listening carefully enough.  But could you please, again without a

20     long explanation, say what is the difference between a plebiscite and a

21     referendum.

22             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Let me reiterate:  It is my upon

23     in this specific case that decision does not exist, in essence, that both

24     are expressions of a will on a specific issue put forward.  But with your

25     leave, by the same token, I do believe that there was a current political

Page 20168

 1     reason because behind the decision not to call the expression of will on

 2     the 9th and 10th of October a referendum but, rather, a plebiscite.  And

 3     this is far as I'm willing to go.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  So what are you now saying is, it is, as a matter of

 5     fact, the same, but there were political reasons to make a distinction?

 6     Okay.

 7             If it ... I hope that it ...

 8             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That's correct.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And then you asked the witness what were the

10     consequences of calling it the one or the other.  So you're asking the

11     witness whether two things that are the same get a -- have a different

12     consequences or different impact, because current political reasons

13     existed to consider it not to be the same.  That is a pretty complex

14     question.

15             Again, I don't understand, to start with, the question; and that

16     is part of what happens at this moment, that the witness explains

17     patiently a lot of things he thinks are more or less related to your

18     questions, questions which are often unclear.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I shall, Your Honours.

21        Q.   Let me provide a quick answer by asking this question.

22             Professor, who was the actor within the constitution and legal

23     system of Bosnia-Herzegovina who is entitled to take a decision on

24     calling a referendum?

25        A.   I would think that be the assembly.

Page 20169

 1        Q.   And the decision on a plebiscite on the 9th and 10th of October,

 2     who did take that decision?

 3        A.   That was taken by the Assembly of the Serbian people.

 4        Q.   Would you agree with me that the Assembly of the Serbian people

 5     in Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time, pursuant to the constitution, could

 6     not have taken a decision on referendum, but the Assembly of

 7     Bosnia-Herzegovina could?

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Just help me follow your questions,

 9     Mr. Stojanovic.  You've just told us that there is, semantically

10     speaking, there is no difference between a plebiscite and a referendum.

11     Judge Orie has tried to go to length to follow your logic on this.  We

12     still didn't understand what you said except to say that they don't --

13     they mean the same thing except when political conditions existed made

14     them mean differently, and you didn't tell us what are those conditions

15     that made them to mean differently and what that different meaning is.

16             Now, when you asked this question, I would like for me to be able

17     to understand to, I would like you to explain what do you mean when you

18     used the word "plebiscite" and what do you mean when you used the word

19     "referendum"?  Can you please do that, because I don't understand and I'm

20     not going to understand the answer that comes from the witness.

21             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, let me reiterate.

22     In the opinion of the Defence, both mean the expression of a will of a

23     group or the entire population of a state.  What is the difference?

24     Pursuant to the then-constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina, a decision on a

25     referendum may be taken only exclusively by the Assembly of

Page 20170

 1     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  If you call something a referendum and you wish that

 2     decision to be legal, then it must be taken by the legal institution or

 3     organ.  If you call something a plebiscite because you want one group

 4     within that state to make their will known, then you do not require a

 5     decision by the competent organise of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  And therein

 6     lies the difference for calling the same thing two different titles.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you for that difference you've told us.

 8     [Microphone not activated].

 9             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] And, in essence, the answer is,

10     a vast majority -- I asked the professor what percentage of the Serb

11     people expressed their will at the plebiscite to remain living in

12     Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

13        Q.   Was that correct, Professor, please.

14        A.   If the question is did the vast majority express their will to

15     remain within Yugoslavia, the answer is yes.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  May I just ask another question.  What percentage

17     of the total population of Bosnia-Herzegovina did the Serbian population

18     constitute?

19             THE WITNESS:  They were about 31 per cent.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

21             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Now I'm going to ask you this, Professor.  Did you collect

23     official information in light of amendment 62?  What was the official

24     result of the referendum that took place on the 29th of February and

25     March 1st, 1992?

Page 20171

 1        A.   I -- I can't remember the -- the precise figures.  I think it's

 2     mentioned in the report.  It was published in the Official Gazette.

 3     It's -- it -- showing was a majority, but I can't remember the

 4     percentage.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Isn't -- is there any dispute about the percentages

 6     and is the outcome of this --

 7             THE WITNESS:  If the issue is was it more than two-thirds or not,

 8     I'm sorry, I just can't remember whether it was more than two-thirds.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  No dispute, Ms. Bibles?

10             MS. BIBLES:  No dispute, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, usually these kind of things, either

12     there is a real dispute about the outcome.  Then focus on that.  Or there

13     is no dispute and then follow what was published at the time as the

14     outcome.  But don't spend time on it with the witness, unless there's any

15     specific issue you want to introduce through that question.

16             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm -- I'm willing

17     to stipulate if the Prosecution agrees that the result of the referendum

18     was that less than two thirds of the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina

19     expressed their will for Bosnia-Herzegovina to be sovereign and secede

20     from SFRY.  If they would stipulate that, I would stipulate as well.

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You can ask them to stipulate.  You can stipulate

22     yourself.

23             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] As I said, I would accept that

24     it was less than two-thirds of the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina who

25     expressed their wish to secede from Yugoslavia on that referendum.

Page 20172

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Bibles, agreed, not agreed?

 2             MS. BIBLES:  Agreed, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 4             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  No further questions

 5     as to this matter.  No need to express percentages.  Let's move on.

 6        Q.   So if less than two-thirds of the population expressed or voted

 7     for independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina and cessation from Socialist

 8     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, would the decision on independence of

 9     Bosnia-Herzegovina contravene the amendment 62 that you see before you on

10     the screen?

11        A.   Well, again, these -- these are legal issues which I think are

12     pretty complicated.  I note that the -- the amendment under discussion

13     refers to changing the boundaries.  I don't know whether that -- to me

14     changing the boundaries means, like, a shifting the line between -- the

15     boundary line between, you know, Bosnia and Croatia or something like

16     that by a few kilometres.  What we are talking about here is basically

17     severing the connection of independence.  I don't know whether that comes

18     within the meaning of this amendment.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  So you say, it's reading the amendment 62, it is

20     unclear to you whether that would be -- would contravene that amendment?

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

24             For the reasons you have explained.

25             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

Page 20173

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             Please proceed.

 3             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Let's look at

 4     65 ter 07482; English page 18, B/C/S page 7.  Article 5 of the article of

 5     the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which we had an opportunity

 6     to see earlier in the day.

 7        Q.   In Article 5 of the constitution of SFRY, it is stated, in

 8     paragraph 3:  [As read] "Border of the Socialist Federal Republic of

 9     Yugoslavia cannot be changed without the consent of all republics and

10     autonomous provinces."

11             Would the decision on independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina without

12     the consent of other republics and autonomous provinces, which make up

13     the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, would contravene article 5

14     of the federal constitution.  You may answer with a "yes" or "no."

15        A.   Well, I am afraid I would have to give the same answer I gave to

16     the previous question.  It's really not clear to me what the -- changing

17     the border means.  Is it the external border, shifting the border between

18     the SFRY and Hungary or something?  Or does the independence of one of

19     the republics come within the meaning of that?  I don't know.

20             And I would have to remark that in -- certainly at the beginning

21     of 1992, two of the republics had already been recognised as independent

22     states, so the idea that the -- all the republics of the -- the SFRY were

23     going to get together and decide something was -- was something that

24     wasn't going to happen.

25        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  Now let's look together at document --

Page 20174

 1     65 ter document bearing number 16158.

 2             Please, let's focus on Article 1 of the decision on the

 3     establishment of the Republika Srpska of Bosnia-Herzegovina stated as the

 4     decision of the Third Assembly of the Serbian people held on the 21st

 5     of -- 11th of December, 1991.  It is being -- it is stated that if the

 6     Serb -- if Croatia and Slovenia were to change their attitude and

 7     position towards Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that the

 8     Assembly -- well, English version is supposed to be seen on the next

 9     page, but I'm sure that you will be able to follow.

10             Do you agree that the decision of the Third Session of the

11     Assembly of the Serbian people is conditional and that establishment of

12     the republic of Serbian Bosnia-Herzegovina will follow through only if

13     the Croatian and Muslim community were to change their opinion towards

14     Yugoslavia?  Was that done in practice?  Was this how it worked in

15     practice?

16        A.   I've -- different things have appeared on the screen.  I'm not

17     sure what we're focusing on at this point.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, could you assist the witness.

19             THE WITNESS:  I'm looking at something about -- about the

20     municipal assemblies here.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you -- Mr. Stojanovic --

22             THE WITNESS:  In English.  I see in B/C/S it's a decision that

23     [Overlapping speakers] ... proceed to the formation of the republic.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  But we first want Mr. Stojanovic to clearly identify

25     what he draws the attention of the witness to.

Page 20175

 1             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do believe we

 2     have a problem.  I stopped receiving interpretation, and -- now it's

 3     okay.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, then, I repeat what I said a second ago.

 5     Please assist the witness in telling him exactly what you are drawing his

 6     attention to.

 7             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Professor, please take a look at the decision from the

 9     4th Session of the Assembly of the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina

10     on the establishment of the republic of Serbian Bosnia-Herzegovina --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic --

12             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] The English version does not

13     correspond.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. -- Mr. Stojanovic, that's exactly the problem.

15     I see in B/C/S, I see decisions which are numbered, 19, 20, 21.

16             First of all, which one do you have on your mind?

17             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Item 21, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  21.  And at this moment, it seems that we have --

19     let me have a look what we have on our screen.  Could we go one page --

20     let me -- one second.

21             It looks as if we are looking at the bottom of 20 rather than 21.

22     Could we move to the next page in English.

23             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Preceding page, if I may.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I asked to go to the next page in English and

25     I would wish to have a look at that page.

Page 20176

 1             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. -- that seems to be the last page in English.

 4             Mr. Stojanovic, do you agree that what we see at this moment on

 5     our screen ends at the left bottom, which seems to correspond with the

 6     end of number 20, that it reads:  "Number 02-53-91," under that, "11

 7     December 1991," and then "Sarajevo," whereas, at the right, it seems that

 8     it is originating from Mr. Momcilo Krajisnik, and it seems that this all

 9     corresponds.

10             If you want to take us to number 21, you have to provide an

11     English translation for 21, which apparently is not uploaded into

12     e-court.

13             That's where we are.

14             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I do believe that you're right.

15     Maybe it would a good time to go for a break, and then in the meantime

16     I'll try to provide an English translation with apologies, of course.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And -- well, English translation is more

18     important even than apologies.

19             We take a break, Mr. Treanor, and we would like to see you back

20     in 20 minutes.

21                           [The witness stands down]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And we'll resume at 20 minutes to 2.00.

23                           --- Recess taken at 1.18 p.m.

24                           --- On resuming at 1.43 p.m.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We're waiting for the witness to be escorted into

Page 20177

 1     the courtroom again.

 2             Would it be a good idea if the parties would try to reach an

 3     agreement on what portions of what constitutions they want to rely upon

 4     and then to have them in evidence to the extent we need them?

 5             Okay.  Mr. Stojanovic, were you able to find a translation for

 6     what appears now on our screen to be number 21 in this -- in this

 7     document?

 8                           [The witness takes the stand]

 9             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, thanks to our

10     dear Janet.  She was successful in identifying the translation.  I would

11     kindly ask Janet to help us with e-court as well, to see the English

12     translation on the screens.  Thank you.

13        Q.   Professor, I will repeat the question I had for you when we still

14     did not have the English translation.

15             It is one of the decisions of the 4th Session of the Assembly of

16     the Serbian People in Bosnia-Herzegovina dated the 21st of December,

17     1991.  It is in item 1:

18             "Preparations are to be made to set up the Republic of Serbian

19     Bosnia and Herzegovina as a federal unit within the federal state of

20     Yugoslavia, if the Croatian and Muslim ethnic communities decide to

21     change their attitude towards Yugoslavia."

22             While conducting your analysis and preparation for your

23     testimony -- in preparation for your testimony, did you also arrive at

24     some kind of knowledge about the decision on the establishment -- sorry,

25     the establishment of Republika Srpska was made under certain

Page 20178

 1     preconditions and it had been directly linked to the position taken by

 2     the Croat and Muslim communities?

 3        A.   Well, yes.  As I indicated there were negotiations going on in

 4     late 1991/early 1992.  The SDA and the HDZ had taken certain steps in the

 5     assembly and in -- after this decision, the -- their government -- the

 6     government that they nominated requested recognition from the EU, and

 7     the -- this is -- this document is predicated on the hope which I quite

 8     like -- may likely, the Bosnian Serbs leadership, would not likely would

 9     have seen as vain, perhaps, that the HDZ and the SDA would not do that,

10     but they did in, as I said, on about the 21st of December, and therefore,

11     on the 9th of January, they -- the Bosnian Serb Assembly adopted its

12     declaration on the establishment of the republic, because the -- the

13     Croats and the Muslims had -- had -- persisted in their quest for

14     independence.

15        Q.   Can we agree, Professor, that in all of the constituent acts

16     starting with the declaration and ending with the constitution of

17     Republika Srpska, there is a clear indication of the position of the Serb

18     people which was its wish to remain within the SFRY?

19        A.   Yes, definitely.

20        Q.   Can we agree that in the constitution of the Serb Republic of

21     Bosnia-Herzegovina, there's a constitutional provision which states that

22     Republika Srpska was to remain part of the SFRY?

23        A.   Yes, that's correct.  And that remained unchanged even after the

24     declaration of independence of the Bosnian Serb republic, at the

25     beginning of April 1992.

Page 20179

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, could I just try to -- I do

 2     understand that - let me just have a look - that you wanted to take us to

 3     that number 21, if I'm understanding you well what -- of what we earlier

 4     had on our screen.

 5             Now we have now e-court which seems to be a decision, and that

 6     refers to that number 21.  But could you look in the original B/C/S,

 7     because I think there are -- only half of that decision appears.  Because

 8     we're now looking at the English.  But going back to what you showed us

 9     earlier --

10             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in the B/C/S

11     version, this decision has --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me have a look now what we have on our screen

13     now.  We have this number 21, but only the first and the second

14     paragraph or sub-articles there.  Now, where is the remainder of the

15     B/C/S?

16             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] The next page in the B/C/S

17     containing a provision of Article 3.  I believe it's before you.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I have a look at that next page.  Because in

19     e-court, as far as I can see it, that page does not follow the one we

20     have on our screen now.

21             So we started with a part of number 21 without an English

22     translation.  We now have a full English translation of that number 21

23     but no full original.

24             I see that you're helplessly looking around but ...

25             Ms. Bibles.

Page 20180

 1             MS. BIBLES:  Your Honour.  I may be able to cast some light on

 2     the difficulties we have.

 3             The Prosecution Exhibit, which originally was called up in this

 4     case, I believe that is 65 ter 16158, is actually the 20th Session we see

 5     in the B/C/S original.  And so the English translation matches the 20th.

 6             So, over the break, Ms. Stewart was able to find the full

 7     translation of the 21st Session, which is what she brought up on the

 8     screen so I'm -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  If I can interrupt you.  I fully understand that the

10     Prosecution supported Mr. Stojanovic to the best of its abilities.

11             But Mr. Stojanovic should have checked before he came to court

12     whether he had a full original B/C/S and a full translation.  Because the

13     one page, which only gives 19 and 20 in full, Mr. Stojanovic, may have

14     been uploaded by the Prosecution for totally different purposes, and they

15     may not have been interested in number 21.  Whereas, if you are, you

16     should take care that it's there in its entirety with a translation.

17             Please proceed, but the Chamber is not much inclined to work on

18     the basis of half originals with full translations.  If they correspond,

19     because they can't check that.  But 21 seems to be very much the same as

20     what apparently Ms. Stewart has provided us with.

21             Perhaps you move on and sort this out and go to your next subject

22     and see, at the end, whether you are in a position to, again, deal with

23     this matter.

24             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Microphone.

25             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, I'll move on.

Page 20181

 1     Although, I have to admit, that I had the other page in paper copy.  But

 2     now I see that in e-court the next page in B/C/S is, indeed, missing.  It

 3     was my omission.  I apologise.

 4        Q.   Professor, bearing in mind what we have discussed about the

 5     decision, can we next, together, look at P3007, which was a decision on

 6     the promulgation of the constitution of the Serb Republic of

 7     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  You have had occasion to see this during

 8     examination-in-chief as well.

 9             In the English, could we go to the next page, please.

10             Bearing in mind your last answer that, in all of the constituent

11     documents, Republika Srpska insisted on remaining part of the SFRY.  In

12     that regard, do focus your attention on Article 4, which reads that:

13     "The republic may enter into associations with state forms of other

14     peoples constitutive of Bosnia-Herzegovina."

15             This is from the RS constitution.  Can you see that, Professor?

16        A.   Yes, I do.

17        Q.   Is this keeping with the decision we saw a moment ago on the

18     establishment of the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, if the Muslim

19     and Croat peoples take a different direction?

20        A.   Well, this -- this article, I guess, would become operative once

21     the -- the Croatian and Muslim peoples decided to ... leave Yugoslavia,

22     certainly.

23        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  Let us look together at a provision of

24     paragraph 245, as well as paragraph 246 of your report, which is P3003.

25     You've already discussed it.

Page 20182

 1             Paragraphs 245, 246, and 247.

 2             Under the provisions of the Law on the Armed Forces, as you

 3     define it in those paragraphs, the Supreme Commander of the armed forces

 4     was the president of the republic.  He commands the armed forces in

 5     keeping with the law and the constitution.  By virtue of changes to the

 6     Presidency, whereby the number of members increased from three to five,

 7     and then we also had the president of the republic with two

 8     vice-presidents, did anything change?  In other words, the regulations

 9     dealing with the issues of the armed forces and commanding the armed

10     forces, did they undertake any changes with respect to the Supreme

11     Commander and who the Supreme Commander was to be?

12        A.   The -- no, I don't believe there were any changes.  The Supreme

13     Commander remained the president of the republic.

14        Q.   During your work, did you familiarise yourself with the notion of

15     the Supreme Command and who comprised it?  The Supreme Command of the

16     armed forces in Republika Srpska.

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Who comprised the Supreme Command?

19        A.   Well, the Supreme Command, as -- as established at the end of

20     1992 - and I'm doing this from my memory; I believe it's in the report -

21     included the -- the members of the Presidency, as it existed at that time

22     and the ministers of internal affairs, foreign affairs, and defence

23     perhaps.

24        Q.   Would you agree with me that, in late 1992, as part of the

25     constitutional and legal system of Republika Srpska, the Presidency no

Page 20183

 1     longer existed as a collective body.  It was, rather, the president with

 2     two vice-presidents.

 3        A.   Yes.  As of 17 December 1992, that's correct.

 4        Q.   Can we also agree that the commander of the Main Staff of the

 5     Army of RS was not a member of the command, the Supreme Command?

 6        A.   Yes, I believe that's correct.

 7        Q.   I would kindly ask that we look together at paragraph 263 of the

 8     same document; P3003.

 9             In paragraph 263, Professor, you say the following:  "Despite the

10     fact that a state of war was never officially declared, apparently for

11     political reasons, there are multiple additional indications that an

12     expanded Presidency was in fact in operation after 1 June 1992."

13             Do tell the Court, please, what you meant by saying that "a state

14     of war was never officially declared apparently for political reasons."

15        A.   Well, a state of war never was declared, and there's -- in the

16     document that's referenced, in that footnote, the contents of which I

17     specifically cannot remember at this time, there was apparently

18     indication -- the why that did not happen.  This was all that that

19     document was probably issued within the context of the discussion about

20     the -- the -- the documents that -- the normative documents that underlay

21     the -- the exist of the expanded Presidency.  This -- there's a lot of

22     discussion in the report about the fact that it mention the state of war,

23     imminent threat of war, or didn't mention imminent threat of war, and so

24     there was a feeling that there had been some discrepancy between the

25     documentation, the laws, as -- as they had been adopted in early

Page 20184

 1     June 1992 and the actual operation of the Presidency and that something

 2     should be done about that, and one of the suggestions was to go back and

 3     amend the laws, the constitutional law, to insert the words "imminent

 4     threat of war" which would cover the current situation because there was

 5     no state of war for -- that -- I think that document says for political

 6     reasons.  But, instead, they decided to reform the institution of the

 7     Presidency entirely by creating a -- having one president and two

 8     vice-presidents on the 17th of December.

 9             What the specific political reasons were, I don't -- I don't -- I

10     don't know.  I -- I could only speculate.

11        Q.   I'm trying to make sure that I understand you.

12             In your report, you say that it will -- happened apparently for

13     political reasons and that, for those reasons, the authorities in

14     Republika Srpska never officially declared a state of war.

15             In your view, what were the political reasons due to which a

16     state of war was never declared?

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, if you've listened well, you would

18     have heard the witness say:  "What the specific political reasons

19     were... I don't know ... I could only speculate."

20             Therefore, the witness apparently observes that a war is going

21     on, on the ground, that a state of war was not declared, and that he

22     thinks that there were political reasons on which he can only speculate,

23     which we usually do not encourage witnesses to do.

24             Therefore, your question is a repetitive one.  Unless you want to

25     hear the speculations of the witness, the Chamber is, as you know,

Page 20185

 1     usually not interested in speculations.  Unless the witness knows certain

 2     facts which he links to what he thinks possibly may have been reasons.

 3             Please proceed.

 4             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Professor, you referred to footnote 729, where you say that, in

 6     terms of your conclusion, one should look at unedited working material

 7     for the reports about the work of the government of the Serbian Republic

 8     of Bosnia-Herzegovina for the period April to June 1992, as well as

 9     Presidency minutes from the 30th November 1992 session.

10             Did you find a specific answer in those documents to the question

11     why no state of war was declared?

12        A.   I don't think so.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  That's what the witness said twice, and you're

14     asking him again.

15             Apparently the footnote is relevant.  You can ask the witness

16     what he found in that footnote that supported his conclusion that there

17     likely were political reasons.  But he said:  I don't know what those

18     reasons are.

19             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20        Q.   When was the decision on proclaiming an immediate threat of war

21     issued?

22        A.   It was issued on the 15th of April, 1992.

23        Q.   Professor, the decision was made one month later, in May 1992.

24     Was this a mistake, or do you have some specific knowledge regarding when

25     it was published as opposed to when it was made?  When did it enter into

Page 20186

 1     force?

 2        A.   Well, my recollection is that it was -- the decision was taken on

 3     the 15th of April and entered into force on that date.  It was published

 4     in the Official Gazette, so ... it would be easy to consult that.

 5        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  Now let's clarify one issue that you

 6     referred to in your report, and that is the issue of the ad hoc organs

 7     established in Republika Srpska.  First and foremost, the issue of the

 8     National Security Council.  What kind of an organ was that?

 9        A.   I -- I take it you're referring to the National Security Council

10     that was formed in 1992.

11             It was formed as a -- as an advisory body basically.  There --

12     there's a -- an issue surrounding the decision creating it in that

13     decision was never published in the Official Gazette, but the -- the --

14     the form that's cited in the report comes from the stenographic record of

15     the assembly session at which it was adopted.  Because there was lot of

16     discussion about the National Security Council and what it should be, and

17     it appears from that stenographic record that the decision was adopted in

18     the form in which it appears in that record, and it is referred to as an

19     advisory body in -- in that decision.  If I'm not mistaken.

20        Q.   In your work, did you notice that the National Security Council,

21     at any point, was established or constituted, and that it issued any

22     proposals or initiatives in keeping with its purview?

23        A.   Well, the -- the -- the council did begin to meet.  We have some

24     minutes of those meetings which are discussed in the report.  It -- it

25     would -- or it -- after its discussions, decisions would be issued in the

Page 20187

 1     name of the -- the two acting presidents of the republic, who were

 2     members of the council.

 3        Q.   Did you notice that that council at any point represented place,

 4     a forum, where important political military decision would be either

 5     taken or proposed, such that would be of import for the Serb Republic of

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   There was nobody from the military personnel as part of that

 9     National Security Council; is that correct?

10        A.   No, I wouldn't say that's correct.  I -- I believe the minister

11     of defence was a member, who was a military person, and he was also

12     designated by the -- by the council to be at least the acting commander

13     of the Territorial Defence at the end of April.  The Territorial Defence

14     being the only armed force, the only military force that the republic had

15     at that time.  It had the police, of course, but this is before the army

16     was created on the 12th of May, so it only had the Territorial Defence.

17     And, again, the minister of defence, who became the -- the commander of

18     the Territorial Defence, was a member of the council.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, it's time to adjourn for the day.

20             Mr. Treanor, we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at

21     quart -- half past 9.00.

22             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  But before I ask you to be escorted out of the

24     courtroom, I would like to instruct you that you should not speak or

25     communicate in whatever way, with whomever, about your testimony, whether

Page 20188

 1     that is testimony given today or testimony still to be given tomorrow.

 2             THE WITNESS:  I understand, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We'd like to see you back tomorrow.

 4             You may follow the usher.

 5                           [The witness stands down]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic, I think you used approximately two

 7     hours.  Are you on track, as far as time is concerned?  Which would mean

 8     that you would finish in the first session tomorrow.  One hour.

 9             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, by all means.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we will adjourn for the day, and we will resume

11     tomorrow, Tuesday, the 3rd of December, 9.30, in the Courtroom III -- I

12     misspoke.  Courtroom II.

13                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.16 p.m.,

14                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 3rd day of

15                           December, 2013, at 9.30 a.m.