1 Tuesday, 27 May 2014
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
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
9 IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 There are no preliminaries announced. There is, however, one
12 matter which I would like to deal with very briefly in private session.
13 Could we move into private session.
14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
15 JUDGE ORIE: I have difficulties in asking to return into open
16 session because the issue was that it's uncertain whether we are in
17 private session, but at least we'll continue in open session. Let's give
18 it another try. We move now into private session.
19 [Private session]
10 [Open session]
11 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
13 While we're waiting for the witness to be escorted into the
14 courtroom, I would like to briefly deal with another matter, that is the
15 Prosecution tendered yesterday, the 26th of May, document 9821 as marked
16 by the witness and that document was given number P6533, but the sacred
17 words that "it is admitted into evidence" do not appear on the
18 transcript. P6533 is admitted into evidence.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Gengo.
21 Mr. Weber.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
23 MR. WEBER: I apologise for interrupting, Your Honour. I just
24 wanted to inform the Court, in line with our earlier discussions about
25 Rule 90(E), this witness has received an admonishment previously in the
1 Karadzic case.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And the Chamber being aware of it leaves it in
3 the hands of the Defence whether or not to ask for a 90(E) notice.
4 Mr. Gengo, good morning. Apologies for letting you wait for a
5 minute. Before you give evidence, the Rules require that you make a
6 solemn declaration. The text is now handed out to you. May I invite you
7 to make that solemn declaration.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I
9 solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and
10 nothing but the truth.
11 WITNESS: SLAVKO GENGO
12 [Witness answered through interpreter]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Gengo. Please be seated.
14 Mr. Gengo, you'll first be examined by Mr. Lukic. You'll find
15 Mr. Lukic to your left. Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.
16 Mr. Lukic, you may proceed.
17 Mr. Mladic, if we instruct the witnesses to refrain from any
18 greetings, you should do the same. Is that clear to you? No loud
19 speaking, Mr. Mladic.
20 Mr. Lukic, you may proceed.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 Examination by Mr. Lukic:
23 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Gengo.
24 A. Good morning.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we have in e-court Mr. Gengo's
1 statement. It is 1D1600.
2 Q. Do you see it before you on the screen?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Do you remember having given a statement to General Mladic's
5 Defence team?
6 A. I do.
7 Q. First I'd like to go to paragraph 20, which is something you
8 pointed out previously. That is page 4 in the B/C/S. We have it at the
9 top of the page in the English version.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] There were some typos pointed out by
11 the witness yesterday. The PAT stands for anti-aircraft guns and they
12 should be 20-millimetre in calibre rather than 21 as stated in the
13 statement. Hence, instead of "21," the statement should reflect "20."
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Lukic, where's PAT in paragraph 20?
15 MR. LUKIC: It says here "heavy machine-guns," so in B/C/S it's
16 "PAT." And for mortars it should say "60-millimetres" for the first one,
17 not "62." Is there a need for me to read the whole paragraph corrected
18 for the transcript?
19 JUDGE ORIE: If the witness -- does the witness have a hard copy
20 of the statement?
21 MR. LUKIC: Not in front of him.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Not in front of him. Perhaps --
23 MR. LUKIC: But he can see it on the screen.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, he can -- if you read it, Mr. Lukic, perhaps
25 the relevant lines, that's okay then.
1 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, we do have a hard copy if it would
3 JUDGE ORIE: If need be, later we could provide it.
4 But could you read the corrected lines, Mr. Lukic.
5 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And could you also give the context in which they
7 appear. It's paragraph 20.
8 MR. LUKIC: It's paragraph 20. First sentence.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. LUKIC: I will read in B/C/S so Mr. Gengo can hear it.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Gengo, I will read out the corrected version and please tell
14 us if it is correct. In other words, the paragraph should read as
16 "The unit opposing -- the opposing unit from the ABiH possessed
17 all kinds of infantry weapons: Heavy machine-guns; 20/1 mm, 20/2 mm, and
18 20/3 mm, and they mostly fired from the Jajce barracks (Mauritana [phoen]
19 Pasino Brdo); they had a Zis 76-millimetre field gun which changed
20 positions frequently; 60-millimetre, 82-millimetre, and 120-millimetre
21 mortars frequently changed firing positions, especially the ones of
22 smaller calibre."
23 Does this reflect your corrections?
24 A. Yes, except for Zmajevac, you forgot Zmajevac which was a forward
25 warehouse post of the Jajce military post in Alipasino Polje.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, you didn't only leave out Zmajevac,
2 you left out the 1st Corps of the BH Army. I just want to correct that
3 because --
4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: -- because otherwise we could form the impression
6 that the witness corrected that.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Also, Mr. Lukic, you said to us a few minutes ago
8 that the 62 should change to 60.
9 MR. LUKIC: Yes, I did.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now when you read you said 62.
11 MR. LUKIC: No, in transcript it's 60.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, I heard "62" in my ears.
13 MR. LUKIC: Thank you for your help.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
15 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Following these corrections, Mr. Gengo, I wanted
17 to ask you whether everything is correctly entered in your statement?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. If I were to ask you the same questions today, would you answer
20 in the same way?
21 A. Yes, fully.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, it would be helpful if you would ask
23 the witness if he signed this statement.
24 MR. LUKIC: Can we see the first page of 1D1600.
25 Q. Mr. Gengo, you see the document on the screen. Is that your
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we go to the last page, please.
4 Q. Do you see your signature before you on the last page of your
6 A. Yes, I can see it clearly.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I'd like to thank Judge Fluegge for
9 reminding me. I would now like to tender Mr. Gengo's statement together
10 with the accompanying documents to be entered into evidence.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Weber.
12 MR. WEBER: No objections.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: The statement, document 1D1600, receives number
15 D473, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Associated Exhibit 1D2060 receives number D474,
18 Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D2061 receives number D475,
21 Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
23 THE REGISTRAR: And document 1D2062 receives number D476,
24 Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Also admitted into evidence.
1 MR. LUKIC: I would read now, Your Honours, with your leave a
2 summary of the statement of Mr. Gengo.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so, Mr. Lukic.
4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
5 Witness Gengo was a member of the 1st Romanija Infantry Brigade
6 of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, situated at Spicaste Stijene. The
7 witness will testify that ABiH snipers were firing upon civilians along
8 the Vogosca-Hresa-Pale road.
9 He will testify that the only war objective of the VRS in
10 Sarajevo was to protect their own people, territory, and did not involve
11 any offensive attacks against the army of B&H in Sarajevo. Army of B&H
12 forces surrounded the VRS in the Sarajevo battle-field.
13 ABiH forces fired from mobile launchers and other weapons mounted
14 on vehicles, including to provoke return fire. ABiH military forces
15 positioned themselves amongst settlements which were continuously
16 inhabited by civilians. UNPROFOR was informed of cease-fire violations
17 and fire from civilian facilities by the ABiH.
18 All the mortars in the battalion of the witness only had
19 co-ordinates for fire upon the line of confrontation. VRS units returned
20 fire when fired upon, exclusively against enemy combat positions.
21 Neither he nor his unit had any intention to cause civilian
22 casualties or terrorise civilians who were under the control of the
23 Muslim authorities. They were informed about the basic provisions of
24 international law of war and humanitarian law through reports, orders,
25 and the media. When required, the higher levels of command would issue
1 orders of various forms of bans with the aim of respecting international
2 law standards.
3 On the 5th February, 1994, day of Markale I incident, he was in
4 the command of the battalion in Hresa, 7 kilometres from Mrkovici. He
5 did not hear any mortar activity nor did anyone report on that fact from
6 his battalion. He was informed that an inspection team would come from
7 the VRS Main Staff, the SRK, and the brigade command, escorted by
8 UNPROFOR. The artillery pieces were not moved from their established
9 firing positions before, during, or after the incident at Markale market.
10 The inspections following the Markale I incident established that
11 VRS positions did not fire upon Markale market.
12 The average distance of the Muslim and Serbian lines were around
13 100 metres.
14 Muslim forces would fire at passenger buses, civilian cars, and
15 everything else that travelled along the Vogosca-Hresa-Pale road. The
16 VRS provided security for the Mostanica spring water-supply line, made
17 UNPROFOR's access possible and that of the teams from Sarajevo, in order
18 to do checks and repairs. Water-supply was never deliberately switched
20 That was summary of the statement of Mr. Gengo, and I would have
21 several questions for him.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please put them to the witness.
23 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 I would ask for the Exhibit P3 to put on our screens.
25 [Interpretation] It is from the Sarajevo binder. We need page 30
1 in the document.
2 Q. Mr. Gengo, we see a photograph. Do you recognise the place
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. What is before us?
6 A. The settlement of Sedrenik.
7 Q. On the left-hand side and in the centre of the photograph?
8 A. Spicaste Stijene.
9 Q. Where is it exactly?
10 A. Here in this upper part.
11 Q. I think it reads "Spicaste Stijene" as well?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. To the left, the TV repeater?
14 A. Yes, it is in the direction of the settlement of Grdonj.
15 Q. You mention sniping in paragraph 29 of your statement --
16 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 39 of your
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. You also said that it was impossible to engage in -- engage them
21 because of the distance and the lie of the land?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. In this photograph can we see your positions?
24 A. No, because they were behind sharp stone, Spicaste Stijene, on
25 the other side of the hill.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I don't know if everyone in the
2 courtroom has the same photograph as me on the screen. Yes, it seems to
3 be the case.
4 Q. Explain to us briefly where were the positions and how far behind
5 the hill were they?
6 A. Well, they were on the other side of the hill by some 10 metres
7 away from the ridge.
8 Q. The positions at Spicaste Stijene, were they exposed to enemy
10 A. The positions at Spicaste Stijene were exposed to enemy fire from
11 the left-hand side, from the repeater station, and from the right-hand
12 side our forces were exposed to snipers. That is why we had to dig
13 connecting trenches which still exist today in order to approach the
14 front trench. The personnel in the trench could only defend themselves
15 by using hand-grenades and nothing else because they couldn't see
16 anything ahead. They attacked us by coming to the ridge of
17 Spicaste Stijene and fired mortars and LPGs, hand-held rocket-launchers,
18 the so-called Zoljas and Osas, thus placing our positions in danger. It
19 so happened that they took three of our trenches at Spicaste Stijene by
20 doing so.
21 After that, once we regained them again, we were forced to
22 strengthen our positions and place barbed wire and a wire fence to serve
23 as a safety net of sorts against their shells so that they wouldn't
24 ultimately reach our trenches. The snipers also engaged us. I remember
25 a soldier who went to pick some cherries 100 metres from the trench line
1 and they hit him through the neck because they had very up-to-date sniper
2 rifles, which we didn't have. It was very difficult for us to extract
3 his body, but unfortunately for him it was too late. He was dead on the
4 spot. His name was Goran Tomic.
5 Q. Thank you. Today if somebody were to be in your positions and if
6 there was no danger of enemy fire, would they be able to fire at Sedrenik
7 from either sniper or rifle?
8 A. No, we had M-76 snipers, 7.9-millimeters, and their range is up
9 to 800 metres in ideal conditions. Since the elevation point
10 Spicaste Stijene and Sedrenik were at 850 metres above the ground and the
11 distance between them was over 1.000 metres, it was impossible and there
12 was no line of visibility. A sniper shooter would have to come to the
13 edge of Spicaste Stijene in order to see Sedrenik.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
15 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I just see on page 12, line 6 that the
16 calibre of the bullets might not have been recorded. I believe the
17 witness did say it.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Could you repeat what the type of weapon was that
19 had a range up to 800 metres in ideal conditions. It was an M-76 and
20 then... ?
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Just the calibre.
23 A. 7.9-millimetre.
24 JUDGE ORIE: 7.9, yes.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I also noticed that some other
1 figures have not been recorded properly so we will have to repeat.
2 Q. What was the distance in height?
3 A. 250 metres between Sedrenik and Spicaste Stijene.
4 Q. And what was the distance between them?
5 A. 1.350 metres.
6 Q. Thank you. Now this has been corrected.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could we ask the witness to describe in
8 detail what he considers to be Sedrenik because looking at maps it is
9 about streets, it's about an area, it's -- and of course the best would
10 be to have a detailed map of that area which is not to be found in P3
11 because Spicaste Stijene is not indicated on the maps specifically
12 dealing with sniping incidents. So we could measure them on a map once
13 the witness has further detailed his answer.
14 Could you tell us what you consider to be comprised? Perhaps on
15 this photograph to start with, what is Sedrenik, where does it begin?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sedrenik is a settlement or a
17 neighbourhood. You can see it in this photo. And the elevation point is
18 the crossroad in Sedrenik of the road that leads to the barracks from
19 Kosevo and that is the crossroads at which the distance was measured.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Let me see. Could you be more precise in telling us
21 exactly what crossroads?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't see it here; however, we
23 are talking about a crossroads of several asphalt roads -- actually,
24 those were village roads.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there any way that you could point at where
1 that approximately is on this photograph? For example, I see a mosque
2 with a -- a white mosque somewhere in the lower right part. Is that
3 starting with the --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, I can see that. And it
5 would be somewhere around there. You can see the road leading up to
6 seven forests, and the crossroads is somewhere over there but you can't
7 see it because of the angle from which the photo was taken. The roads
8 come from this direction and from this direction.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now you see there's also a marking on that map
10 with an arrow which seems to be added to it F16 which seems to be also a
11 smaller settlement. Would that also be part of Sedrenik?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, all of that was called
13 Sedrenik. There may have been some smaller neighbourhoods or
14 settlements, but all of them comprise Sedrenik.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes and are -- is the distance from there to
16 Spicaste Stijene, is that the same or is it different?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It depended on the point from which
18 measure. It can be more or less. If you're measuring from the
19 crossroads, it's 450 metres. If you're measuring from a house which is
20 further away, then the distance would be greater. So it all depended on
21 the point from which you start measuring.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you said it's 450 metres from -- that you
23 had measured -- from the crossroads. From -- 450 metres from
24 Spicaste Stijene to that crossroad; is that 450 metres?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, 1.350 metres, a mistake.
1 JUDGE ORIE: So the distance between Spicaste Stijene and
2 Sedrenik very much depends on what point in Sedrenik you choose for the
3 measurement; is that well understood?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, yes, yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And you mentioned 1.350 metres. I think earlier I
6 heard "850," but perhaps I was -- oh, yes, I see now, it's page 13.
7 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic, but for distances it appears that for
8 the Chamber to fully understand the evidence we might need a bit more
9 details on maps.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Q. Mr. Gengo, were you on the site with the Karadzic team?
12 A. Yes. There was a girl called Nadja, I believe, as well.
13 Q. It doesn't really matter who the team members were.
14 But why did you take measurements and how come you measured 1.350
16 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness and the counsel be alerted to
17 the fact that they have to be interpreted.
18 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
19 Mr. Gengo, you should take a short break between question and
20 answer, otherwise the interpreters cannot interpret in a language we
21 understand what you say.
22 Mr. Weber is on his feet as well.
23 MR. WEBER: If Mr. Lukic could please assist the Prosecution with
24 directing us to where this information about a visit to the site is
25 discussed by the witness and the particular measurements that were taken.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could you include that perhaps in your
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. When we talked recently, did you point out the fact to me? Did
5 you tell me that you were on the site with the Karadzic team?
6 A. Yes, yes.
7 Q. And did you also tell me that you took measurements from the
8 instant at a certain address? This was not recorded. From which point
9 did you take measurements at Spicaste Stijene?
10 A. It was number 156 in Sedrenik. I don't know which house it is,
11 but its number is 156. In the indictment it says that a young girl was
12 injured by sniper there, and when we took measurements it was 1.350
13 metres and the difference in height was 250 metres.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
15 Mr. Weber.
16 MR. WEBER: If during the next break we could get a little bit
17 more information about this. I do not see it a part of the proofing note
18 or any information that's been disclosed to the Prosecution. If we could
19 have some further information about just what exactly happened.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, you are asking questions about it, so I
21 take it that you have been informed about from what house it was
23 MR. LUKIC: I was informed from number 156.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And which house is that? Are you serious in telling
25 us that you don't know what house that is? So you are presenting
1 evidence about a house of which you are not aware of which house it is,
2 and then you expect us to draw any conclusions from that? Is that the
3 position of the Defence?
4 MR. LUKIC: I didn't want to enter into so much details, but
5 Your Honour, [Indiscernible] -- all the details we now had to ask the
7 JUDGE ORIE: General, sweeping statements do not make good
8 evidence. So to say you could fire or you could not fire without knowing
9 what we are talking about -- I mean, these details are vital, also for
10 the Defence I would say. Therefore, at least the witness told you about
11 an incident with a little girl. Did you verify which incident he was
12 talking about?
13 MR. LUKIC: He was talking about the incident in connection with
14 number 156 on Sedrenik.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but is that one -- he talks about an incident
16 in the indictment. Did you verify which one it is? Is it in our
17 indictment? Is it not? I see only one -- I see F16 in our case
18 appearing prominently. Did you verify whether it's the same or whether
19 it's a different one?
20 MR. LUKIC: I think we have only one incident from Sedrenik.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's -- but is that the same one or is it a
22 different one?
23 MR. LUKIC: All right.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, the Chamber wouldn't mind if you would
25 take the Defence seriously. Please proceed.
1 MR. LUKIC: The witness didn't know the name of the
2 [Overlapping speakers] and I couldn't clarify --
3 JUDGE ORIE: The witness gives his evidence what he observed,
4 what he knows. You're in charge of the Defence to put that in context,
5 to make that information for the Chamber on which it can rely if it has
6 to make any determinations in this case. You can't say the witness -- of
7 course the witness is just here to tell us what he knows; you should put
8 it in context. It's your Defence case. And to say a measurement of 1350
9 metres, not knowing what house we are talking about. When there's one
10 sniping incident in Sedrenik, the first that comes to your mind is:
11 Would that be the distance between Spicaste Stijene and the -- where this
12 incident happened? Is the witness talking about the same incident, yes
13 or no? Or the same location which is related to the incident? I mean,
14 these are the basic, primary questions that immediately come to anyone's
15 mind who is preparing a defence.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 And now I would like to call up 1D2037 in e-court.
19 Q. Mr. Gengo, this is a document in English. It was drafted on the
20 5th of February, 1994. It is a letter sent by General Milovanovic. We
21 already read it during your preparation for this testimony. Do you
22 remember that?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. Under 1 it says to:
25 "Establish immediately a mixed expert military commission of the
1 representatives of UNPROFOR, the Army of the Republika Srpska, and the
2 so-called Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina ..."
3 That was a proposal to UNPROFOR. Do you remember from back then
4 that there were such intentions? Was that commission ever established?
5 Did somebody come to visit your unit?
6 A. At that time, I don't remember there was a mixed commission of
7 any kind, including Muslim forces, UNPROFOR, and our representatives;
8 however, there was a commission that arrived on the 6th of February and
9 visited the positions of the 7th Battalion. There were also the
10 representatives of the 1st Romanija Brigade, the representatives of the
11 corps, and the representatives of the Main Staff. They arrived around
12 10.00. I sent them my security officer who was in charge of co-operating
13 with UNPROFOR and I asked him to take them to Mrkovici. They went there
14 on that day, they spent about three hours there, they returned, and the
15 officer reported to me about what had transpired; and then they left. I
16 don't know where they went.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, this is all in the statement; you are
18 aware of that?
19 MR. LUKIC: I just want to enter this document --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
21 MR. LUKIC: -- into the evidence.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine. But if you have any additional
23 questions --
24 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] --
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- then please make something new.
1 Mr. Weber.
2 MR. WEBER: No objection, but just if we could clarify: With
3 respect to this document, there are references to 6 January 1994. It's
4 the Prosecution's understanding that that's just a typographical error,
5 that should be the 6th of February, 1994. I don't know if the Defence
6 has the same understanding of that.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
8 MR. LUKIC: Exactly, yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so the parties do agree that the reference to
10 the 6th of January in this document which dates from the 5th of February,
11 1994, is a mistake and should read "February."
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could we have a look on the last page of the
14 MR. LUKIC: Yes, can we have the last page.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Is there -- is another typo, then, Mr. Weber, I take
16 it on the second page where it talks about the 5th of January which in
17 the context should also be understood as the 5th of February, 6.00 in the
18 afternoon to receive a response.
19 The parties do agree on that as well?
20 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
21 MR. WEBER: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then --
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: What about item 5, last line, January 7, 1994; is
24 that correct?
25 MR. WEBER: Yes, as Your Honours have already noted that in the
1 context of the date of this letter, I believe that the reading should
2 more likely be that it's referring to February, not January.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Everything -- the author of this document was one
4 month behind.
5 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] --
6 JUDGE ORIE: With this understanding, Madam Registrar, the number
7 would be?
8 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D2037 receives number D477,
9 Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: D477 is admitted into evidence.
11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 Q. Let me just ask you briefly. You said that BiH army did not
13 represent -- accept to be members of the commission. On that occasion,
14 did the Serbian side try to hide anything?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Did you see an order, were you verbally ordered to remove or
17 destroy any evidence before that visit?
18 A. No, nothing of the kind happened.
19 Q. Without any order, did you still try to conceal something?
20 A. No.
21 Q. You told us that Muslims opened fire from civilian populated
22 areas. Was there an obligation for Muslim forces to remove civilians
23 from which they launch assault operations?
24 A. Yes, there was an obligation on their part to do that; it was
25 their duty.
1 Q. The rules of the former JNA, did they envisage such a thing,
2 i.e., that civilians should be removed from the area from which attacks
3 were launched?
4 A. Yes, civilians had to be protected in any case and in any way.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Gengo. This was all I had for you. Thank you.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
7 Mr. Weber, are you ready to cross-examine the witness?
8 MR. WEBER: Yes, Your Honour, if I could just have one second.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 Mr. Gengo, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Weber. You'll
11 find him to your right and Mr. Weber is counsel for the Prosecution.
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Weber:
13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Gengo. Can you hear me?
14 A. Good morning. I can hear you very well.
15 Q. I just want to start today with some basic questions before the
16 next break. They relate to your brigade. In your statement you indicate
17 that you were a member of the 216th JNA Mountain Brigade in 1991. Is it
18 correct that the 216th Mountain Brigade was part of the JNA 4th Corps?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Dragomir Milosevic was the commander of the 216th Mountain
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. The headquarters of the 216th Mountain Brigade was located in
24 Han Pijesak?
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Is that a question, Mr. Weber?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 MR. WEBER: They are questions, Your Honour. If you'd like I can
3 say --
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It sounds like a statement of witness evidence.
5 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 If it's okay to proceed, I do believe the witness answered the
7 last question.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and next question is phrased in a way that it
9 also looks like a question.
10 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 08603 for
11 the witness.
12 Q. Sir, coming up before you is a 4th Corps order to the command of
13 the 216th Mountain Brigade dated 17 May 1992. I'd like to direct your
14 attention to item 4 on the list which says:
15 "216th Mountain Brigade is receiving the title: 1st Romanija
16 Brigade ..."
17 Is it correct that your brigade was renamed the
18 1st Romanija Brigade in May 1992?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Directing your attention to item 1, is it correct that this
21 occurred at the same time that the 4th Corps was renamed the
22 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Is it correct that with this redesignation you became a member of
25 the Army of Republika Srpska in May 1992?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. In paragraph 2 of your statement, you indicate that you were the
3 commander of the tactical maintenance weapons and ammunition workshop
4 from 1991 until September 1992. Is it correct that you occupied the same
5 position after the brigade was renamed?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Dragomir Milosevic -- excuse me, is it correct that Dragomir
8 Milosevic also continued to serve as commander of the 1st Romanija
9 Brigade until February 1993?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. After then-Colonel Milosevic was transferred to the Drina Corps,
12 is it correct that Vlado Lizdek became the commander of the
13 1st Romanija Brigade?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. After this redesignation occurred in May 1992, is it correct that
16 the headquarters of the 1st Romanija Brigade remained in Han Pijesak?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution would
19 tender this document and I'm about to head into another topic, if this is
20 a good time for a break.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, the number would you please?
22 THE REGISTRAR: Document 8603 receives number P6534,
23 Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections, therefore admitted into
1 We take a break now before we turn to a new area.
2 Could the parties provide a map specifically of the
3 Spicaste Stijene area and -- so that we have at least an opportunity to
4 further verify -- of course preferably with houses numbers, but even if
5 not the Chamber would like to be able to consider asking further
6 questions about the matter.
7 MR. WEBER: Of course, Your Honour. And yesterday Mr. Groome
8 used 65 ter 9821, which I believe is a detailed map; however, I looked on
9 the electronic version on it and when you do zoom in it is difficult to
10 see things. If it's okay with the Chamber, I can bring back enlarged
11 hard copies of that map, if it would assist.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Whatever you have which might serve us. Of course
13 it's important to be able to see whether -- where F16 is, if the parties
14 could provide further information about an incident with a little girl
15 which appears in the indictment, then of course we would be better able
16 to understand the details of the evidence of this witness.
17 We take a break, but not until after the witness has been
18 escorted out of the courtroom.
19 You may follow the usher, Mr. Gengo.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 JUDGE ORIE: And we resume at ten minutes to 11.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
25 Mr. Lukic, could at any point in time could we have a closer look
1 at D474, 475, and 476, because the marking seems not to be very clear.
2 Perhaps you could first already yourself have a look at it. These are
3 the associated exhibits.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, you may proceed.
6 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honours.
7 Q. Mr. Gengo, is it correct that you were in Han Pijesak from May
8 until September 1992?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is it correct that you were in Han Derventa between
11 September 1992 and January 1994?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. During that time - so I'm speaking between May 1992 and
14 January 1994 - is it correct that you were not involved in the planning
15 of any operations as a battalion commander?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Is it correct that you are not familiar with the operations
18 carried out by your brigade during your time in Han Pijesak and
19 Han Derventa between May 1992 and January 1994?
20 A. Yes, partially.
21 Q. When you say "yes, partially," is it correct that you for the
22 most part are not familiar with the operations that were carried out
23 during your time in Han Pijesak and Han Derventa?
24 A. Yes, because I was involved in logistics and for the most part I
25 was not familiar with any of that because I was on field missions.
1 Q. Right. So aside from your role in logistics, you would not be
2 familiar with the operations of your brigade during that time?
3 A. I said "yes, partially," but I didn't know everything.
4 Q. Sir, did you -- is it correct that you provided or you attended
5 an interview with members of the Office of the Prosecutor on 16 October
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Sir, I want to read you one of your answers during that interview
9 and ask you if you stand by it. This is at page 23 of the interview
11 "At the time I was the commander of the battalion and what
12 happened during that, I was responsible for that" --
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can we have that on the screen?
14 MR. WEBER: Of course, Your Honours. It's uploaded as
15 65 ter 30671, e-court page 23. And to assist Your Honours, I believe
16 it's towards the bottom of the page from lines 27 and onward starting
17 with the answer at line 30.
18 Q. Sir, in response to a question you stated:
19 "At the time I was the Commander of the Battalion. And what
20 happened during that I was responsible for that. Everything what took
21 place ... had taken place before or what took place after, I don't know
22 what happened before or after me."
23 Do you stand by this statement?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. I'd like to move on now to actually discussing your time as
1 battalion commander. In paragraphs 3 and 4 of your statement you
2 indicate that you were a battalion commander between January 1994 and
3 February 1995. My first question is: Did you become a battalion
4 commander in early or late January 1994?
5 A. No. It was in early February. I can't remember the exact date.
6 I believe that it was on the 27th of January. There must be an order to
7 that effect. There is an order, as a matter of fact.
8 Q. Okay. I just want to ask you a couple of things just so we have
9 a clear record. In your last answer you said: "It was in early
10 February." And then you indicated you couldn't remember the date. And
11 then you said you believe it was on the 27th of January. Do you maintain
12 your evidence that you became a battalion commander in January 1994?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Do I correctly then understand your evidence that you believe it
15 was sometime toward the end of January 1994?
16 A. Yes -- huh?
17 Q. Sir, did you say something? I'm sorry, the transcript did not
18 record you?
19 A. No, no, no, I didn't say anything. I said that I stand by the
20 fact that it was in late January 1994.
21 Q. Okay. Thank you, sir. During your time as battalion commander,
22 is it correct that there were over 800 men subordinated to you?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Is it correct that there were at least 650 men in the infantry
25 companies of your battalion?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Is it correct that there were 15 men in the communications
3 section of your battalion?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Is it correct that you maintained communications with the brigade
6 command; the Kosevo Brigade, your neighbouring brigade to the west; and
7 the 4th Mixed Artillery Regiment?
8 A. Yes, but the Kosevo unit was a battalion, not a brigade.
9 Q. Thank you for that clarification. It was a part of a different
10 brigade than your own; correct?
11 A. It was under the command of the 3rd Sarajevo unit.
12 Q. Is it correct that your communications functioned well?
13 A. For the most part.
14 Q. Is it correct that the commander of the 4th Mixed Artillery
15 Regiment, also known as MAP, was Radislav Cvjetkovic?
16 A. Radislav Cvjetkovic was his name.
17 Q. Thank you, sir. Is it correct that there was a mortar platoon
18 consisting of 36 or 37 men subordinated to you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is it correct that the mortars could not be used without your
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Did the mortar crews ever fire without your approval?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Is it correct that you needed to seek authorisation from your
1 superior command in order to fire your mortars?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And in turn, your superior command could only authorise the
4 firing of a mortar with the approval of the commander of the
5 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is it correct that there were 82- and 120-millimetre mortars were
8 positioned to face targets located inside the inner ring of Sarajevo?
9 A. On the positions of the enemy side, and co-ordinates were given
10 for those positions -- for the defence of our positions, that is.
11 Q. Sir, please listen to my question carefully. Those positions
12 were located inside the inner ring of Sarajevo; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Your mortar crews could not see into the city from their
15 positions; is that correct?
16 A. That is correct, yes.
17 Q. Is it correct that each of your mortar crews possessed a firing
18 table at every mortar location?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. In your statement you describe different weapons and projectiles
21 used by the ABiH. Is it correct that they fired these projectiles from
22 the Jajce barracks and a forward position located outside of town in
23 Pasino Brdo?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. When you were firing a 120-millimetre mortar round from Mrkovici
1 toward these locations, is it correct that the distance travelled by
2 those projectiles would be in the range of 3 to 4 kilometres?
3 A. It depended on the target.
4 Q. Well, sir, I'm asking specifically from your positions in
5 Mrkovici to the Jajce barracks or Pasino Brdo, is it correct that the
6 range would be approximately 3 to 4 kilometres?
7 A. Yes, approximately.
8 Q. I would like to discuss with you some other locations. You've
9 mentioned that some areas you were aware of were inhabited by civilians.
10 Is it correct that the areas facing your battalion from inside the inner
11 ring were inhabited by civilians?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Is it correct that this included the area known as Sedrenik?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Is it correct that this also included the slopes of Grdonj?
16 A. Slopes of Grdonj, yes.
17 Q. During your time as a battalion commander, you knew these areas
18 contained private houses and family homes; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is it correct that the city centre was also a residential area?
21 A. Yes. Yes, that's true.
22 Q. During direct examination you were asked some general questions
23 about precautions relating to civilians. I'd like to more specifically
24 ask you: What precautions did you take to minimise civilian casualties
25 when firing?
1 A. I did not understand your question. Could you please repeat? I
2 don't know what answer you expect from me.
3 Q. Of course. When you were authorising your subordinates to fire,
4 what precautions did you take to minimise civilian casualties?
5 A. But what side did you have in mind? Did you have in mind the
6 opposing side or my own side?
7 Q. I have in mind you.
8 A. Please repeat.
9 Q. I'll ask again. When you were authorising your subordinates to
10 fire, what precautions did you take to minimise civilian casualties?
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The witness wanted to know if you are referring
12 to civilians of the opposing side or of the own side.
13 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You should clarify that in your question.
15 MR. WEBER:
16 Q. Well, what I'm talking about, sir, is civilian casualties that
17 could result as a consequence of your firing. So wherever you were
18 firing to, what precautions did you take to minimise civilian casualties?
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just to be clear, Mr. Weber, are you talking of
20 perhaps firing at Jajce barracks or Pasino Brdo?
21 MR. WEBER: I'm talking about whenever he was authorising his
22 subordinates to fire, what precautions did he take to minimise civilian
23 casualties in those areas that were being targeted.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When it comes to my side, I did not
25 have anything to discuss with the opposing side. If the opposing side
1 opened mortar fire on my positions and it was done -- and if it was done
2 from a mobile mortar, they were supposed to secure that place to make
3 sure that the returning shell would not hit civilians because they were a
4 legitimate military target for me. A mortar that was placed either in
5 front of a school or in the middle of a settlement was a military
6 legitimate target. It was not up to me to try and see what surrounded.
7 It was the opposing side that was supposed to do that in order to avoid
8 civilian casualties. All I could do was to target well so there was no
9 dissipation of fragments, an unnecessary dissipation of fragments.
10 MR. WEBER:
11 Q. You said a number of things just there.
12 A. What is it that you want me to say?
13 Q. If you could wait for my question, please. Is it correct that
14 you did not take any precautions, that you merely left it up to the
15 opposing side; is that your evidence?
16 A. What was I supposed to do on the opposing side? I couldn't do
17 anything, could I? I could not really remove their own civilians away
18 from their pieces, from their weapons.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could we just try to clarify matters. Do I
20 understand your testimony well that you authorised firing exclusively if
21 you had been fired at and that the target was the origin of the fire that
22 targeted you?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And do I understand your testimony well that if that
25 fire came from an area which was inhabited possibly by civilians, that
1 the measure you took was to be as precise in hitting your target as you
2 possibly could but that if civilians would be hit in that area, that you
3 considered that to be a responsibility of the opposite party?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, because in that
5 case they would be collateral damage, not a specific target.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, that's apparently the evidence of the
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put a follow-up question to the witness.
9 Sir, some minutes ago you said - this is to be found on page 30,
10 line 10 to 12 - Mr. Weber put to you:
11 "Your mortar crews could not see into the city from their
12 positions; is that correct?"
13 And your answer was:
14 "That is correct, yes."
15 How were you able to distinguish the target between civilian
16 settlements and the positions of mortars directed to you without being
17 able to see the inner city?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were places from which you
19 could see it. For example, across from the area of Borije and we could
20 see their positions from ours and the crews would let us know where they
21 were. There were observers reporting on which parts the fire was coming
22 from. However, the crew on its own could not do that.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
24 MR. WEBER:
25 Q. Sir, I'm going to read you an answer you provided during the
1 interview on the 16th of October, 2012.
2 MR. WEBER: And, Your Honours, for reference this is on page 29
3 of 30671.
4 Q. During that interview you stated:
5 "Hand-grenades are not like a pear that you can put it in a bag
6 or here or there. As you know, it explodes and shrapnel have wider
7 domain causing injuries. So it was inevitable that the civilians would
8 get hurt as well."
9 Do you stand by that statement?
10 A. Not hand-grenades but mines. No one can throw a hand-grenade
11 1300 metres far.
12 Q. Sir, if I could clarify. I actually believe -- is it correct
13 that you're referring to mortars, "grenata"?
14 A. Yes.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Weber, you used the term "hand-grenades."
16 MR. WEBER: I appreciate it. I was just reading directly from
17 the hand-grenades, but I appreciate the witness's --
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In the transcript there is no reference to
19 hand-grenades but to grenades.
20 MR. WEBER:
21 Q. With that clarification, do you stand by that statement?
22 A. I stand by the fact that there were mortar shells which were
23 hitting a space of 50 square metres. Whoever was inside that area may
24 have been hurt.
25 Q. Is it correct that you knew that it was inevitable that civilians
1 would be hurt?
2 A. If they were inside the area, it was normal to expect that they
3 might become injured by pieces of shrapnel.
4 Q. In paragraph 23 of your statement, you state:
5 "Potential victims among the civilians could be considered
6 collateral damage."
7 Is it correct that this is how you viewed the Muslim population
8 living in the areas you shelled?
9 A. No.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't fully understand the question, Mr. Weber.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, there was no intentional
13 JUDGE ORIE: No. For collateral damage of course there is no
14 intentional targeting. That is what is in the definition of "collateral
16 But I didn't fully understand your question, Mr. Weber.
17 MR. WEBER:
18 Q. When you say potential victims among the civilians, are the
19 civilians that you're referring to the Muslim population that lived
20 inside the inner ring?
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you answer the question?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please repeat the question.
23 MR. WEBER:
24 Q. In your statement when you say potential victims among the
25 civilians, are the civilians that you're referring to the Muslim
1 population that lived inside the inner ring?
2 A. There were Serb inhabitants, Croat inhabitants, and others. I
3 don't know who could have been there. The question is not completely
4 clear to me. There was no way for me to know.
5 Q. Then should we understand you mean generally the population
6 living inside the inner ring?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Now, in paragraph 27 of your statement you state that:
9 "We informed UNPROFOR about every instance of abuse with regard
10 to the deployment of military targets, fire from civilian facilities, and
11 cease-fire violations."
12 Is it then correct that the United Nations Military Observers, or
13 UNMOs, in Sarajevo would have possessed information regarding the
14 activities of the SRK?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Is it correct that units of the SRK regularly shelled the city
17 centre and Sedrenik?
18 A. No.
19 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have P4610 for the
21 Q. Mr. Gengo, coming up before you here is a UNMO sitrep dated
22 26 December 1993. It's covering the period between the 25th to the 26th.
23 I'd like to direct your attention to the part of the sitrep that states:
24 "The tension in Sarajevo decreased but the city still remains
25 unstable. There was reduced activity during the whole day. The activity
1 was mainly in the CFL," confrontation lines, "areas. 70 per cent of the
2 total impacts. The residential areas shelled today were the city centre
3 as always, the area of Sedrenik," and then there's other areas that are
5 Then just so we have a little bit more of a picture here, I'd
6 like to direct your attention down on the report a little bit to under
7 section 2, which I believe you can see on the B/C/S version. It states:
8 "UNMOs confirm the following: Bosnian incoming - 266 mixed
9 impacts, Bosnian outgoing 2 explosions, Serb incoming 34 mixed impacts,
10 Serb outgoing 108 mixed rounds ..."
11 I just want to make sure we're clear about a couple of things
12 before we start discussing some items. Do you understand that this
13 report indicates that the UNMOs observed 266 impacts in ABiH territory
14 and 34 impacts in the area of the SRK?
15 A. Yes, depending on the degree of their objectivity in reporting
16 those figures --
17 Q. Sir, I just want to make sure we have some understanding on some
18 facts and then we'll discuss it a little bit further. Do you also
19 understand that on this date the UNMOs observed 108 outgoing rounds from
20 the SRK and two outgoing rounds from the ABiH?
21 A. Yes, if they were objective and I don't think they were. I don't
22 think these figures are realistic.
23 Q. I take it from the "they" you're referring to UNMOs?
24 A. Yes, yes, whether they recorded it all properly.
25 Q. Sir, let's go on the information that's here. There's evidence
1 in this case --
2 MR. WEBER: And for Your Honours this is referring to transcript
3 page 5470.
4 Q. -- that mixed impacts refer to the possible combination of tank,
5 mortar, and artillery rounds. I'd like to just go one by one with these.
6 Could you tell us which SRK brigades were able to target Sedrenik with
7 their tanks?
8 A. Perhaps from the sector of Trebevic.
9 Q. Yes. And what brigade and battalion would that be?
10 A. The Trebevic Battalion of the 1st Romanija Brigade.
11 Q. Which SRK brigades were able to target Sedrenik with their
13 A. Again, the 1st Romanija Brigade.
14 Q. Which SRK brigades were able to target Sedrenik with their
16 A. Well, it could have been the 4th MAP.
17 Q. Yes, and could you please tell us the types of artillery they
19 A. They had 155-millimetre howitzers, they had 122-millimetre
20 assets, and they had I think a 130-millimetre cannon.
21 Q. Is it correct that the 4th MAP would operate in your zone of
23 A. They had their positions in the area of Sreposko [phoen].
24 Q. Is it correct that the 4th MAP would operate in your zone of
25 responsibility? If you could please be clear.
1 A. They had their positions behind my back because they were
2 supposed to provide us with support.
3 Q. I'd like to move on to the other residential area that's
4 discussed in this UNMO report. Which SRK brigades were able to target
5 the city centre with their tanks?
6 A. Only the 1st Sarajevo unit and the Igman -- no, not the Igman
7 unit but the Ilidza unit.
8 Q. And when you say the 1st Sarajevo unit, are you referring to the
9 1st Sarajevo Mechanised Brigade?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And when you are referring - just so we have a clear
12 understanding - to the Igman unit, you're referring to the Igman Brigade;
13 is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Which SRK brigades were able to target the city centre with their
17 A. The city centre, I don't know. It depended on their positions.
18 I don't know where the mortar positions of the other units were.
19 Q. Okay. How about for the 1st Romanija Brigade?
20 A. The 1st Romanija Brigade had mortar positions, as I mentioned. I
21 told you where they were deployed in my unit. I don't know for other
23 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness be asked
24 to speak up. We barely hear him.
25 MR. WEBER:
1 Q. Sir, if there's anything additional --
2 MR. WEBER: I'm sorry, Your Honour, if you wanted to go ahead.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, could you please speak a bit louder and into
4 the microphone so that the interpreters can hear you better.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
6 MR. WEBER:
7 Q. And, sir, I'm not sure if we missed any part of your answer
8 there, so if you could please repeat your answer to the last question.
9 And if you don't remember it, I can repeat the question.
10 A. Please do.
11 Q. I'll rephrase it slightly just so it's clear. With respect to
12 the mortars of the 1st Romanija Brigade, is it correct that they were
13 able to target the city centre with their mortars? And, sir, I'd remind
14 you you've already said that they had an approximate range of 3 to 4
16 A. Yes. I think I said I don't know where the mortars of other
17 battalions were. I only knew where my mortars were.
18 Q. I think your evidence is sufficiently clear on that.
19 Which SRK brigades were able to target the city centre with their
21 A. Repeat, please.
22 Q. Of course, sir. I'd be happy to. Which SRK brigades were able
23 to target the city centre with their artillery?
24 A. Well, all save for the Igman and the Ilijas one.
25 Q. And when you say "all," you're including the brigades that were
1 directly attached at the corps level, such as the 4th MAP?
2 A. Yes, yes.
3 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution now please have P542 for the
5 Q. Mr. Gengo, this is a UNMO sitrep for the evening of 4 February
6 1994, the night before the Markale shelling. The sitrep indicates:
7 "Most impacts in the period of 1600 to 2359 hours on the 4th of
8 February "seemed to be close to the confrontation line ...," and it lists
9 a number of areas including an area east of city centre with a grid
10 reference that is near Sedrenik. During this period the sitrep indicates
11 that the BiH incoming were 64 mixed rounds and 14 anti-aircraft rounds
12 and no BiH outgoing were seen or heard. Eight mixed BSA outgoing rounds
13 were observed along with 50 anti-aircraft rounds.
14 Is it correct that this sitrep shows that the SRK was firing on
15 areas of Sarajevo and it was not in response to any incoming fire?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. These were legitimate military targets.
19 Q. Sir --
20 JUDGE ORIE: That --
21 MR. WEBER:
22 Q. -- that was not my question.
23 MR. WEBER: If Your Honour --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please --
25 MR. WEBER: I'm sorry, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
2 MR. WEBER: Okay.
3 Q. Is it correct that this sitrep shows that the SRK was firing on
4 areas of Sarajevo and it was not in response to any incoming fire?
5 A. Well, I don't know about this report, but I don't think it was
6 the case. We never opened fire from our positions without a good reason.
7 Q. Sir, you really haven't answered my question yet. I'll repeat it
9 Is it correct --
10 A. Please do.
11 Q. Is it correct that this sitrep shows that the SRK was firing on
12 areas of Sarajevo and it was not in response to any incoming fire?
13 MR. LUKIC: We can read it from the document. This is not a
14 question for the witness, Your Honour. I object to this --
15 JUDGE ORIE: It is a question for the witness, Mr. Lukic.
16 Earlier we asked him a question about responding to incoming fire.
17 Please, could you please answer the question.
18 And it's relevant also in view of other evidence that we have
20 Could you please answer the question whether this document
21 indicates that sometimes the -- that areas of Sarajevo were fired at
22 without this firing being triggered by incoming fire?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is possible that their bunkers
24 and fortifications were targeted. That's the only possibility. No one
25 fired at the city and at civilians at random.
1 JUDGE ORIE: The question is whether this report indicates that
2 even without incoming fire - and you may have had many reasons to do
3 that - but whether it happened that you fired at targets without --
4 without that being a response to incoming fire?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Only if we were trying to improve
6 our tactical position in order to deal with a certain part of territory
7 so as to have the enemy withdraw further away from any roads. That's
8 when it could have happened.
9 JUDGE ORIE: So the first answer is: Yes, it happened that you
10 fired not in response to incoming fire but for other reasons, if I
11 understood you well?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
14 MR. WEBER: Could we please have the next page of this document.
15 Q. Mr. Gengo, this is the sitrep for the next morning on 5 February
16 1994. It lists that the areas that were shelled near the confrontation
17 line and it then states:
18 "... residential areas shelled were city centre ..."
20 "UNMOs have confirmed the following: BiH in - 22 mixed impacts,
21 BiH out - none observed, BSA in - none observed, BSA out - 3 mortar."
22 Is it correct that this sitrep also shows that the SRK was firing
23 and it was not in response to incoming fire?
24 A. Can I have the document? I can't see it.
25 Q. Sir, it should be appearing before you and it does. This is the
1 sitrep for the next morning.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Can you see it, Witness? If it's not on your
3 screen, the usher should assist.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see it.
5 MR. WEBER:
6 Q. Please let me know if you need to review the document. I'd be
7 happy to repeat my question.
8 A. I've read the document. Please repeat your question.
9 Q. Is it correct that this sitrep also shows that the SRK was firing
10 and it was not in response to incoming fire?
11 A. I don't know if the report is objective as compiled by UNPROFOR
12 and whether they reported on the correct figures regarding the other
14 Q. Sir, that doesn't answer my question. Is it correct that this
15 sitrep also shows --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the sitrep shows what the author of the sitrep
17 has observed. Whether that happened or not is of course a different
18 question. So if you say: Does the document show that this and this
19 happened, then of course the witness is right in saying that it depends
20 on the reliability of the observations by the authors of the document.
21 MR. WEBER: Well --
22 JUDGE ORIE: But of course it would be a legitimate question to
23 ask the witness that: If this is reported and whether he has an
24 explanation for such a report, and you could ask these type of questions,
25 Mr. Weber.
1 MR. WEBER:
2 Q. Sir, is it correct that during this time that you were -- was
3 this during the time-period in which you were located over 7 kilometres
4 away from the front line on the 5th of February, 1994?
5 A. What do you mean 7 kilometres? Where did you find that number?
6 I don't understand.
7 Q. I believe in your statement you indicated that on the 5th of
8 February, 1994, you were in Hresa, approximately 7 kilometres away from
9 the front line.
10 A. Yes, the alleged conflict, but it wasn't really like that.
11 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, I --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. LUKIC: I'll let the witness answer the question, but how I
14 read this document, it does not distinguish the line -- first it
15 enumerates areas and at the end it says --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
17 MR. LUKIC: -- how many grenades.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, if you want to point to anything, then we
19 should do that in the absence of the witness because we are guiding the
20 witness on how to read the document, which of course is not -- if he --
21 do you understand any English, Mr. Gengo?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please take off your earphones for a
25 MR. LUKIC: May I? Thank you.
1 From this document it does not say whether those grenades were
2 targeting -- it says CFL by conflict line or it's essential, so if we
3 want to establish the distance we should know where exactly these shells
4 were targeted.
5 JUDGE ORIE: But I do understand that the distance had to do with
6 where the witness was.
7 MR. LUKIC: But it depends from the line or from the centre.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, how essential are the 7 kilometres?
9 MR. WEBER: I came away from the document to establish the
10 witness's -- and I'm talking now outside the presence of the witness, to
11 establish the whereabouts of the witness.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay.
13 MR. WEBER: To establish the fact he would not know anything to
14 dispute this document.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the witness says so in paragraph 40 of his own
18 MR. WEBER: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So I think the parties could agree on where that
20 location is where the witness was at that time, and that apparently is
21 the only thing you want to establish at this moment. Not many people can
22 see at a distance of 7 kilometres. That's --
23 MR. WEBER: Correct.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- or 5. Yes.
25 Mr. Lukic, it's clear?
1 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, "Svedok," could you -- yes. If I say
3 "witness," he might not hear it without earphones, without translation.
4 Then I'm also looking at the clock at this moment.
5 Mr. Weber, perhaps we first ask the witness to take a break.
6 MR. WEBER: Of course, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: To be escorted out of the courtroom.
8 MR. WEBER: And, Your Honour, we do have some maps present,
9 enlargements of the area that you requested.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 [The witness stands down]
12 JUDGE ORIE: By the way, the 7th kilometres is in the statement,
13 Hrasna, 7 kilometres from Mrkovici, not from the confrontation lines, not
14 from the impact, but from Mrkovici.
15 Yes, could you, if you would have those maps available, could I
16 just have a very quick look at it so to see whether it serves our
17 purpose. Oh, the usher is out. Perhaps the Chamber staff could
18 exceptionally assist in giving it to Madam Registrar, who will then
19 further distribute it. Yes, for the Defence as well. Yes.
20 Mr. Lukic, we were a bit confused when you asked the witness
21 questions about the measurement and I think you referred to a young girl
22 appearing in the indictment. From what I see, the one and only sniping
23 incident, if it is sniping, because the adjudicated facts say it's
24 machine-gun fire, is F16.
25 MR. LUKIC: And it's a boy.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And it's a boy of 14 years old. So that's -- must
2 be -- that measurement seems to be therefore pretty irrelevant for us.
3 MR. LUKIC: I learned from the witness that he went in 2012 and
4 led by Karadzic team to one location in Sedrenik.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes [overlapping speakers] --
6 MR. LUKIC: -- establish with him which incident so I couldn't go
7 further with him. He knew the address in front of which they were and
8 from where they measured.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay -- [overlapping speakers].
10 MR. LUKIC: I checked the statement, I checked the medical
11 documents, I checked the police report, and I have the numbers here, but
12 there is no address. So --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
14 MR. LUKIC: -- with this witness I couldn't compare those data.
15 JUDGE ORIE: No.
16 MR. LUKIC: So I got from him what I could get from him.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And perhaps if I look at -- at least at P3,
18 without saying anything about whether it's all accurate or not, but if I
19 look at the photographs in P3, if I look at the marking in P3 for the
20 location where the young boy was apparently or allegedly hit, then could
21 the parties try to agree that that is not yet half of 1.350 metres from
22 Spicaste Stijene. Just looking at the maps. Whether true or not. Could
23 the parties try to figure out -- by the way, most of Sedrenik would be
24 within a distance far shorter than 1 kilometre if I look at maps only,
25 and the area is -- as you may see, there are many roads there which are
1 called Sedrenik.
2 Then there is another matter, Mr. Weber. I carefully looked at
3 the map in P3 in relation to F16 and to the photographs, and there seems
4 to be an inconsistency in the marking in the photographs about the house
5 and the plotting on the map where F16 apparently is located. I couldn't
6 say that it makes a lot of difference, but it looks as if there is a
7 dislocation of some 50 metres. So -- but would you please carefully look
8 at that material to see what explains the inconsistency between the
9 photograph -- at least what I think I noticed as an inconsistency. I'm
10 not giving any judgement on that, but at least it struck me. If anyone
11 is interested why it struck me, I could explain that, but we will refrain
12 from doing it now.
13 MR. WEBER: Of course, Your Honour, we will look into it.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then we take the break and we will resume at 20
15 minutes past 12.00.
16 --- Recess taken at 11.58 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 12.21 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
19 [The witness takes the stand]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, you may proceed.
21 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honours.
22 Q. Mr. Gengo, I would now like to briefly turn and discuss the
23 location of Spicaste Stijene a little more. Is it correct that this
24 position was held by the VRS throughout 1992 until 1995?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Is it correct that there was only one evening on the 18th of
2 September, 1994, that this location fell under the ABiH control?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is it correct that Spicaste Stijene is an elevated point where
5 one can see parts of the city of Sarajevo? And if so, if you could just
6 go ahead and tell us the parts that can be seen.
7 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes [overlapping speakers] --
9 MR. LUKIC: Since we established the positions of his unit, I
10 would -- [No interpretation].
11 THE WITNESS: [Overlapping speakers] --
12 JUDGE ORIE: One second, not all at the same time.
13 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, if we could --
14 MR. LUKIC: Can you -- can you take --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
16 MR. WEBER: -- the witness --
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can you please just take off your
18 earphones for a moment.
19 [In English] We established that positions of his unit were not
20 on the top but below the top of Spicaste Stijene, so I think that --
21 JUDGE ORIE: 10 metres I think the witness said.
22 MR. LUKIC: -- a properly phrased statement should be: What
23 could you see from your positions, not from Spicaste Stijene, because
24 that might confuse the witness if you climb up --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it's typically a question for further
1 examination, Mr. Lukic.
2 MR. LUKIC: Okay.
3 JUDGE ORIE: If you want to --
4 MR. LUKIC: Should I tell the witness to put on his headphones?
5 JUDGE ORIE: I'll draw his attention by calling him Mr. Svedok,
6 to put on your headphones.
8 MR. WEBER:
9 Q. Sir, is it correct that Spicaste Stijene is an elevated point
10 where one can see parts of the city of Sarajevo?
11 A. Yes, if you go out to the edge, which was impossible because then
12 we would be exposed to cross-fire as I already said once.
13 Q. Sir, if you could please listen carefully to my question, they're
14 very specific. What parts of the city of Sarajevo can you see from the
15 elevation of Spicaste Stijene?
16 A. I said parts of Sedrenik, if you go out to the edge, but that was
17 impossible because we were exposed to sniper fire.
18 JUDGE ORIE: What could you see if you were at the edge?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You could see houses and densely
20 populated areas down there, nothing else.
21 MR. WEBER:
22 Q. Is it correct that this view was made easier by the fact that the
23 forest between the top of Spicaste Stijene and Sedrenik was cut down by
24 civilians who needed wood for heat?
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: The force or forest?
1 MR. WEBER: The forest.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's been corrected.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It had nothing to do with the
4 forest. Forest was up the hill next to our lines because this was not a
5 populated area. It's an elevated point, so you could see the houses if
6 you were able to go out to the edge. And as for the wood, they did cut
7 the trees in order to have heating.
8 MR. WEBER:
9 Q. Sir, I'd now like to move on and discuss some things from your
10 statement in this case.
11 MR. WEBER: If we could please have D437 -- or, I'm sorry, 473
12 for the witness.
13 Q. Sir, before you is the statement in this case, the Mladic case.
14 Is it correct that you were interviewed by members of the Mladic Defence
15 team on four occasions prior to signing your statement on the 10th of
16 May, 2014?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Did you decide on what should be included or not included in your
20 A. I gave a statement and everything that I said was included.
21 Q. Okay. But did you personally decide and not anyone else what
22 should be included or excluded from your statement?
23 A. Well, I said what I did and they included it. There is nothing
24 else to it.
25 Q. Did you decide to exclude anything from any of your previous
1 statements during your interviews with the Mladic Defence?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, the question phrased as such may create
3 confusion. If there are previous statements, there are two
4 possibilities: Either you do not tell again what you said in the
5 previous statements or you say same things and it's not recorded in the
6 statement. Which of the two -- perhaps we could ask the witness.
7 Did you not tell the Mladic Defence any relevant information
8 which you had given during interviews that you had given before?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can you please repeat the question.
10 I'm not sure what you would like me to answer.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The question is: When you were interviewed by the
12 Mladic Defence, was there any relevant or significant matter which you
13 didn't tell the Mladic Defence but which you had told others before in
14 previous interviews?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Second question now: Was there anything you had
17 told the Mladic Defence which was not then included in the written
18 version of your interview, your statement?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MR. WEBER:
22 Q. How many times have you spoken with or seen Milorad Dzida between
23 2011 and today? And the name, I'm sorry, I might have garbled it, it
24 should be D-z-i-d-a?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Is it clear to you, Witness, to whom Mr. Weber
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could you then answer the question how many times
4 you have spoken with him between 2011 and today?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, several times. I don't know
6 the exact number, but several times.
7 MR. WEBER:
8 Q. When was the most recent occasion that you've spoken to him?
9 A. Well, before I came here.
10 Q. Can you approximate how frequent you see or talk to Mr. Dzida?
11 A. Not frequently, just occasionally when we happen to meet. He
12 works -- what his job is -- we are not even living close to each other,
13 so ...
14 JUDGE ORIE: Is that once a month? Is that once a year? Could
15 you be a bit more precise, approximately.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, if I were to add up all such
17 pleasant days, perhaps five or six times a year.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And you said in one of your previous answers:
20 "Well, before I came here I have spoken to him the last time."
21 Was it this morning or yesterday or before you left your
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the place where we live, that
24 is to say in Pale.
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That means some days ago?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
3 MR. WEBER: Can we please have page 6 of both versions of the
5 Q. Sir, I'm going to be drawing your attention to paragraph 31 in
6 the statement, which in the B/C/S version is at the top. This paragraph
8 "Occasionally, groups of snipers armed with sniper rifles and
9 passive scopes would come to the zone of responsibility of the unit
10 opposed to us for night-time sniper fire. They would fire against our
11 positions and leave the area."
12 A. Yes, that's correct.
13 Q. I'd now like to go to your Karadzic statement which is uploaded
14 as 65 ter 30664, and specifically page 7. And to -- if I could ask the
15 court officer to maybe provide the witness with a hard copy of his Mladic
16 statement so he's able to see both at the same time.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if it's available could the usher assist.
18 Mr. Lukic, I take it that there's no problem.
19 MR. WEBER: If it's okay, Your Honour, if I could just mark
20 Mladic on the top.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Put a big M on it, then that would be clear for the
23 The hard copy of the statement which is now given to you with a
24 large M on it, that is the statement you gave to the Mladic Defence.
25 You'll later be invited perhaps to compare.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. WEBER: If we could please go back one page in this
3 statement, I'm sorry, I may have had the incorrect page. It's paragraph
4 27 I'm looking for.
5 Is this 65 ter 30664?
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Is the statement in this case, in the Mladic
7 case, on the screen?
8 JUDGE ORIE: We are now looking at the screen at the Karadzic
9 statement, Mr. Weber.
10 MR. WEBER: Can I please see the ERN at the top. I have a
11 different statement.
12 Your Honours, I'll just come back to it after the break.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
14 MR. WEBER: I have a different ERN for Mr. Gengo's statement in
15 the Karadzic case.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: If you could indicate the ERN number, perhaps the
17 court officer will be able to locate it.
18 MR. WEBER: Sure, thank you. I will do that.
19 Q. I will go to just another topic before moving on. I'll return to
20 this later. I'd just like to talk to you about the Mostanica spring very
21 quickly. In paragraph 33 of your statement you discuss the Mostanica
22 spring which was a part of Sarajevo used for water-supplies. I know this
23 is a clarification you made before in the Karadzic case, but could we
24 also make this clarification here. Could you please clarify whether
25 you're referring to the Moscanica spring with a C and not a T?
1 A. I think it is actually Moscanica.
2 Q. Do you recall in the Karadzic case making the clarification that
3 it's Moscanica and then being shown a document?
4 A. Yes, yes. That was the only source of water in my area.
5 Q. Okay. So do you accept the fact that it -- the proper reference
6 would be Moscanica spring, with a C?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Okay. If you could just very briefly describe to us what is the
9 Moscanica spring?
10 A. It is the source of a small river where some of the water is
11 captured. Part of Sarajevo is supplied from that source which was under
12 our control. Throughout the war while I commanded the battalion, the
13 representatives of the other side and UNPROFOR representatives were
14 allowed access to carry out maintenance and we guarded the reservoir so
15 as to avoid any kind of abuse or to avoid someone putting something into
16 the water. We basically took care of the water itself and the spring.
17 Q. In your statement you indicate that the VRS provided security for
18 this water-supply line and you state:
19 "The water was never deliberately switched off."
20 Do you stand by this statement?
21 A. It was never deliberately switched off, yes.
22 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 30669. And
23 if we could go to page 3 of the report.
24 Q. This is an UNPROFOR report dated 26 October 1993. If we could
25 please go one more page in the B/C/S version forward.
1 Sir, this translation just became available. Let me know if it
2 does not appear before you. The part that I'm directing your attention
3 to is something I know has been read to you before. It's in the English
4 the second paragraph from the bottom. It states:
5 "WHO experts suggest that the biggest humanitarian problem facing
6 Sarajevo at the moment may be water. Recent shelling has cut the
7 electricity to the Bacevo pumping station and has further disrupted the
8 water distribution system --"
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I'm not sure if in B/C/S we have the right page
10 on the screen.
11 JUDGE ORIE: This seems to be the right page now.
12 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. The paragraph then continues:
14 "In addition, the Serbs have now cut off water coming from
15 Moscanica, the small back-up system the city used to use when Bacevo was
16 not functioning. The amount of available water in Sarajevo has
17 consequently shrunk considerably. The incidence of hepatitis A in the
18 city is increasing. An epidemic is possible."
19 Do you accept that on the basis of this document that the Serb
20 side did cut off water at some point in time from Moscanica?
21 A. I did not command the battalion at the time. I don't know of
22 this case. What I said was that during my tenure it was never cut off.
23 Q. Okay. So in your statement then we should understand your
24 statement: The water was never deliberately switched off to just be a
25 reference to your time as a battalion commander between January 1994 and
1 February 1995?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And you accept the fact there may have been occasions where it
4 was cut off and you just do not know of that?
5 MR. LUKIC: Objection. Either he knows or he has to speculate,
6 so the question should be precise.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber -- yes, well I think the question was
8 whether he accepts the fact that it may have happened without his
9 knowledge, and that is not that it happened but it may have happened.
10 Could you please answer the question.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember and I have no such
13 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear, but you also cannot exclude for the
14 possibility without having knowledge of the times you were not in that
15 specific position?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please tell me what is it that
17 you're interested in?
18 JUDGE ORIE: In your answer to my question.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please repeat it then.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I think it may be clear already, but Mr. Weber
21 asked and I again asked you: If you say: I'm not aware of that case,
22 that you also cannot exclude that it happened when you were not a
23 battalion commander?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yeah, well, I don't exclude it. It
25 is possible but I have no such information.
1 JUDGE ORIE: That's a clear answer.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
3 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, I've read the one paragraph with the
4 relevant information. Unless the Chamber would actually like the
5 document, I was going to move along and not tender it.
6 JUDGE ORIE: No, but there is another matter in relation to this.
7 Could we have D476 on the screen.
8 Mr. Lukic, you presented this as evidence. Could you tell me now
9 where that spring is because you presented this as the map on which the
10 witness marked where the spring is and I have difficulties in finding it.
11 And since it is your --
12 MR. LUKIC: We had the same problem as Your Honours that -- to
13 see where that is marked. And when I was enlarging it, I was able to see
14 because I was driving the whole map on the screen, but now again maybe
15 it's better to ask the witness to direct us all.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 Could you tell us where we do find this spring, Witness, on this
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It needs to be enlarged.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but what part should be enlarged? East? West?
21 North? South of this map?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The northern part is where the
23 spring is, behind our positions.
24 JUDGE ORIE: "Behind our positions," what positions?
25 MR. LUKIC: Now we can see the circle.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of the Army of Republika Srpska.
2 It is shown on the map. I made those markings. You have the map. It is
3 in red, the positions and all.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, I think I now see it. It's north-easterly
5 direction from the centre of town -- yes, I see at least now something
6 which looks like a circle. That's where I have to look and that's -- so
7 that is in the -- yes, it's clear to me. Thank you.
8 Yes, perhaps -- wouldn't it be better if the witness marks it
9 again and could the usher assist so that -- could you please re-mark it.
10 The usher will assist you so that -- and then we have a more detailed
11 map. In the lower left part we have the centre of town of the city.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could you mark it again so that it becomes clearer?
14 You can do it on the screen. The usher will assist you.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't see the spring here. I
16 don't know what it is that I marked. Was it the mortar positions or the
17 spring itself?
18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We couldn't hear the end
19 of the answer because the witness is not speaking into the microphone.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you please better speak in the
22 But in your statement it says that you marked the location of the
23 Moscanica spring on this map. So if you could do that again and if you
24 can't see it then we leave it at that.
25 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, red marking made.
2 Madam Registrar, that would receive now number?
3 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Document as marked by the witness
4 receives number D478, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: D478 is admitted into evidence.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
7 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. If we could just clarify something. In paragraph 37 of your
9 statement you state:
10 "There were never any plans to move our lines forward."
11 Is it correct that based on the answers you've given today that
12 there were, in fact, plans at times to move your lines forward?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Is it your evidence that there was no direction in your brigade
15 to undertake operations against -- offensive operations?
16 A. Yes, that is correct.
17 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have P04476.
18 Q. Sir, I just wanted you to see the front page of this document
19 again. It was shown to you before in the Karadzic case. It is an order
20 from SRK Commander Stanislav Galic dated 26 January 1994. Is it correct
21 that this is approximately ten days before the Markale shelling?
22 A. It is correct.
23 MR. WEBER: If we could please have page 8 of the English and
24 page 6 of the original.
25 Q. Sir, this has been gone through with you before and I know this
1 is a dense page, so I'm going to read portions of it to you. If at any
2 time that -- you have trouble finding that portion, please let us know.
3 This is a part of the report or part of the order that's under the
4 section of decision of the commander. I'm directing you to the part that
6 "With the main manoeuvre forces with the support of forces in
7 contact and by using all available means, exert strong pressure on the
8 Muslim forces in Sarajevo and liberate ...," then there is a series of
9 locations and they include Colina Kapa and Grdonj. And then the order
11 " ... and penetrate deep into the region of Brekin Potok and
12 Dobrinja creating thus favourable conditions for the wider scale
13 offensive activities for the forces by the forces of the corps and the
15 Is this consistent with your assertion that there were no plans
16 for any offensive operations?
17 A. Whatever happened was in order to improve our tactical position.
18 From what I can see and from what I know was that the area of the
19 Igman Brigade and the technical repair institute were in danger. The
20 enemy had to be pushed back from that elevation point because they
21 couldn't operate. Parts of the Ilidza unit were also in danger and they
22 had to improve their tactical position. The 3rd Sarajevo unit had the
23 same situation in the Pretis factory which was a special-purpose
24 industry. They couldn't work and had to push the enemy back from the
25 elevation points in order to be able to use the road nearby. The Ilijas
1 Brigade in the Visace [phoen] area had the task to push the enemy back
2 there and to improve their tactical positions so as to be able to use the
3 road which would secure the functioning of the technical repair institute
4 in Hadzici. Those were the tasks that had to be implemented but not all
5 of them were in the end.
6 Q. Sir, I'm asking you about this for a very specific reason. And
7 just to remind you the reason I'm showing you this document again is
8 because according to your statement you state there were never any plans
9 to move our lines forward.
10 In the Karadzic case, if you could recall, Judge Kwon asked you
11 in this document what was meant by wider-scale offensive activities that
12 are mentioned in this document. This is at transcript pages 29841 to 42
13 of those proceedings. You stated:
14 "Combat activities, improving the tactical position, in order to
15 move a line forward to fortify you have to get the enemy to move from a
16 hill in order to take it, in order to have a dominant position."
17 Do you stand by this testimony?
18 A. I stand by my testimony that we wanted to improve our tactical
19 position in order to function unhindered. We needed the roads and
20 companies of vital importance to be operational. That was the task of my
22 Q. Is it correct that this involved moving your lines forward?
23 A. It concerns improving tactical positions. It wasn't our
24 intention to take Sarajevo. We never received any such orders.
25 Q. Is it correct that this involved moving your lines forward?
1 A. Improving tactical positions rather than moving lines forward.
2 They had previously captured those areas and made incursions from them,
3 so we had to push them back. They were advancing. We used to hold those
4 positions in the past.
5 Q. Are you saying that you were taking positions?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could we -- instead of asking the same question ten
7 times and hearing the same answer ten times -- I do understand your
8 testimony to be the following: That now and then it happened that you
9 had to move the lines, but not gain a lot of territory, just to get hold
10 of the control of a road or something like that and not with the
11 intention of gaining much territory but rather adapting the overall
12 unchanged confrontation lines in such a way that you would be able to
13 function better. And that is what you meant by tactical improvement. Is
14 that well understood?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
17 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
19 MR. WEBER:
20 Q. The section of the order continues to state:
21 "Further in the operation by holding the MOS in Sarajevo firmly
22 encircled, inflicting casualties, preventing supplies from arriving, and
23 preventing evacuations, using all means to exasperate them and with
24 offensive activities along the following axes ..."
25 And then it lists several lines of combat. Is this consistent
1 with your understanding of the kind of operations being undertaken by the
3 A. Please repeat your question.
4 Q. Do you need me to repeat the section of the document or just my
6 A. You're question. What did you want from me?
7 Q. Is the section of the document that I've just read to you
8 consistent with your understanding of the kind of operations being
9 undertaken by the SRK?
10 A. Yes, I confirmed that to the Judge, that's what it is.
11 JUDGE ORIE: What was just read to you is not exactly the same as
12 what I put to you. But what you read and then what was read here to you,
13 is that consistent with your understanding of your operations?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
16 MR. WEBER:
17 Q. Mr. Gengo, I now want to change topics and turn to the question
18 of the mixed commission you describe after the Markale shelling on the
19 5th of February, 1994. Is it correct that you first learned of the
20 shelling on the radio and television on the same day of the incident?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. At what time did you learn of the shelling through the media?
23 A. Sometime in the afternoon. I don't know when exactly. It was
24 the main news on the radio.
25 Q. In paragraph 36 of your statement you claim that you were
1 informed by the brigade command about a mixed commission on 5 February
2 1994. Do you recall what time that was at?
3 A. Sometime in the evening.
4 Q. In your statement you indicate that the -- well strike that.
5 Did you immediately tell Major Dzida about this commission?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness kindly repeat his answer.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat your answer.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please repeat the question.
10 MR. WEBER:
11 Q. Did you immediately tell Major Dzida about this commission?
12 A. I don't recall him being there at that moment but I do remember
13 telling him that they were going to be there the next morning at 10.00
14 and that he should be ready to take them to the location. I conveyed to
15 him what was conveyed to me by the duty brigade officer, I conveyed the
16 order to him.
17 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, and I apologise, I think it might be my
18 pronunciation, but I see in the transcript the name is being recorded a
19 certain way. The spelling of the name I'm trying to say is D-z-i-d-a.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, with a D in the middle which was left out for
21 some time.
22 MR. WEBER:
23 Q. How long did you wait to tell Major Dzida?
24 A. I don't remember. It was a long time ago.
25 Q. Well, did you tell him that evening? Did you wait a day? Two
1 days? Could you give us some approximation?
2 A. I think I told him in the morning, as far as I recall.
3 Q. Mr. Gengo, is it correct that the commission that you describe in
4 your statement was never formed and it did not conduct an investigation?
5 A. The mixed commission was not established because the Muslim side
6 refused to come there.
7 Q. Okay. Let's be even more precise about it. The commission that
8 I'm referring to is the mixed commission that you describe as composed of
9 VRS Main Staff, SRK command, brigade command, and UNPROFOR members. Is
10 it correct that that commission that you described was never formed and
11 did not conduct an investigation that you describe?
12 A. No. The mixed commission, as ordered by the chief of the
13 Main Staff, was never established and never attended the scene. They
15 Q. Sir, I just don't want there to be a confusion. I'm talking
16 about the commission that you're talking about in your statement. Is it
17 correct that that was never formed and did not conduct an investigation,
18 the one you're describing in your statement?
19 A. That commission did come, but the other commission that was
20 supposed to be established and get there on the 7th or some date never
21 arrived there and was never established, at least to my knowledge.
22 Q. Let's go through a couple of things. You do not know who the
23 UNPROFOR -- you do not know who the UNPROFOR members were who took part
24 in this commission?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Is it correct that you do not know how many UNPROFOR members were
2 part of this commission?
3 A. No, I never counted them, no.
4 Q. Is it correct that you do not know the names or nationalities of
5 any of the UNPROFOR members who took part in this commission?
6 A. No, no. I never met them. I never looked at them. I only know
7 that --
8 Q. Sir --
9 A. -- the people who came to visit my battalion --
10 Q. We're going to go through each of them, so if we could just go
11 one by one.
12 Is it correct that you do not know the names of anyone from the
13 VRS Main Staff who were part of this commission?
14 A. No, I didn't.
15 Q. Is it correct you don't know the names of anyone from the SRK
16 command who were part of this commission?
17 A. I didn't pay attention. I don't know.
18 Q. Is it correct you don't know the name of the representative from
19 the brigade command who took part in this commission?
20 A. I know his name. One of them was Jakovljevic and the other one
21 was Mile Pajic, and the first one was a warrant officer.
22 Q. This person you are describing, Jakovljevic, you don't know his
23 first name, do you?
24 A. I don't know his name. Perhaps you will be able to find it among
25 the papers. I know that his family name was Jakovljevic and that he had
1 arrived from Rijeka when the Yugoslav army was withdrawing from there.
2 Q. According to your statement, Major Dzida was the individual
3 selected to represent the battalion command. Why did you select someone
4 who did not have any mortar experience?
5 A. He was a security officer. It was his job to take them to the
6 sector where the unit was deployed. That was part of his job
7 description. Every time when UNPROFOR representatives arrived, he would
8 be with them.
9 Q. Now, is it correct that in your Karadzic testimony you stated
10 that Major Dzida authored a report regarding this inspection? Do you
11 stand by that?
12 A. Yes, he reported to me.
13 Q. And not just that he reported to you, is it correct that it's
14 your evidence that he actually documented the event in a written report?
15 A. He had to send it to the brigade command, to his superior along
16 the professional line, i.e., the brigade security officer.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The question is whether he wrote a report?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose he did. I suppose he did
19 it in a written form. He just reported to me and he had his line of
20 reporting that went up to the brigade and he was supposed to send the
21 report to them.
22 JUDGE ORIE: To summarise, he reported to you orally, if I
23 understood you well?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And he was supposed to send a written report but you
1 do not know whether he report such a report and whether he did send it to
2 his superiors?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, that would have been along
4 the security line.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
6 MR. WEBER:
7 Q. Sir, I'm going to read you a part of your Karadzic testimony from
8 transcript pages 29807 to 08. You were asked a question:
9 "No doubt you asked Dzida to put it in writing in a report
10 addressed to you?"
11 Your answer was:
12 "Of course he wrote a report and that report was sent to the
13 brigade command, and I suppose that the brigade's representative drafted
14 a report on his part.
15 "Q. Did you receive a copy of Dzida's report?
16 "A. I did."
17 Do you stand by this testimony?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, aside from Major Dzida's report that you received a copy of,
20 did you see a copy of a report from anyone else?
21 A. No, no, I didn't.
22 Q. Is it correct that you never saw any photographs, videos, or
23 sketches from the investigation?
24 A. Only in the media.
25 Q. Okay --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, Mr. Weber.
2 I do understand that your testimony in Karadzic was that you
3 received a copy of a report. In one of your previous answers you told me
4 that you do not know whether there was a written report. How can you
5 receive a copy of a report if you say: I don't know whether there was a
6 written report?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether Dzida wrote to
8 his superior organs in the brigade along the security line. That's what
9 he was supposed to do.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you said you received a report. I just
11 asked you a minute ago how he reported to you, whether he orally reported
12 to you, you confirmed that --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] His report to me was oral and then
14 when he found time, he drafted a written report.
15 JUDGE ORIE: But you say you do not know whether he finally wrote
16 a report. You didn't say anything about the report being sent to you.
17 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
18 JUDGE ORIE: We do not receive interpretation at this moment.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He reported to me and then after a
20 certain time he drafted the appropriate documentation and sent it where
21 he was supposed to, after a couple of days I suppose.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I do understand from your Karadzic
23 testimony that you received a copy of that written report, whereas to me
24 a minute ago you told me that you did not know and you just assumed that
25 he had written a report and that he had sent it to his superiors. Now,
1 which of the two is true? Did you ever have a copy, piece of paper, in
2 your hands; or do you just assume that he wrote such a report?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He did write it a few days later,
4 not on the same day. He verbally reported to me. That's what I had in
5 mind and that's what I meant. That was on the 6th. He immediately
6 reported to me.
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear. But did you ever receive a copy of
8 the written report he did send to his superiors?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that I did receive a copy
10 from him, but I don't remember. It was such a long time ago. I believe
11 that he did copy me.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you're not certain about that and therefore
13 what you said in your Karadzic testimony is not fully accurate?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Why do you say it's not accurate?
15 Whatever I said there was accurate.
16 JUDGE ORIE: You said you received a report and now you say: I
17 don't remember whether I received a report.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I told you that I didn't receive it
19 on that day. I said that that report was submitted to me a few days
20 later. I don't know exactly when. On that day, on the 6th, he reported
21 verbally to me.
22 JUDGE ORIE: It's not -- you're not at this moment reflecting
23 exactly what you said before, at least how it was translated.
24 Mr. Lukic, I leave it in your hands whether you want the
25 interpretation to be verified or whether we really are dealing in this
1 moment with a testimony which changes on details from line to line.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
3 MR. WEBER:
4 Q. Sir, I'm going to read you another portion of your Karadzic
5 testimony --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, Mr. Weber, I've forgotten to look at the
7 clock. Perhaps it's time to take a break.
8 MR. WEBER: Okay, Your Honour, I was just going to do this one
9 question --
10 JUDGE ORIE: If it's one question and if you would then move to
11 another subject, then you're invited to finish with this one question.
12 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. I just want to read you a portion of your Karadzic testimony.
14 This is from transcript page 29808.
15 "Q. Did anyone from this mixed commission provide you with
16 photographs or videos or sketches of the scene, that is to say the
17 location at Mrkovici where --" and the question was cut off with your
19 "No, no, no."
20 Do you stand by this testimony?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. WEBER: That was going to be my one question.
23 JUDGE ORIE: That was your one question.
24 Witness, we'll take a break. Would you please follow the usher.
25 [The witness stands down]
1 JUDGE ORIE: And we will resume at 20 minutes to 2.00.
2 --- Recess taken at 1.22 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 1.41 p.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: While we are waiting for the witness to come in,
5 Mr. Lukic, on the Defence order of witnesses we found an item GRM005
6 which apparently will be interrupted. The Chamber, however, does not
7 know the reasons yet and whether we have approved because I see
8 continue -- scheduled for the 30th of May, continued the 4th of June, and
9 then the 2nd and the 3rd of June different witnesses.
10 [The witness takes the stand]
11 JUDGE ORIE: And no one specifically for the 4th.
12 Apparently Mr. Mladic receives no translation. Calm.
13 Mr. Lukic, there may be a problem with -- okay. I don't expect
14 an answer immediately, but if you would please ...
15 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I'm not aware of any interruption. We
16 are sure that we will have witnesses --
17 JUDGE ORIE: No, no --
18 MR. LUKIC: -- I know that for --
19 JUDGE ORIE: What I mean is that for one witness who starts at
20 the 30th of May --
21 MR. LUKIC: Oh, yeah.
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- is scheduled to continue for the 4th of June,
23 whereas other witnesses are scheduled for the 2nd and 3rd of June, and
24 we --
25 MR. LUKIC: I know the answer. These gentlemen were fixed for
1 those days and they have to leave.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you -- in order to re-arrange the usual
3 order of examination-in-chief and cross-examination, you would have to
4 explain to the Chamber and to the Prosecution why it is and whether the
5 Chamber approves this way of proceeding.
6 MR. LUKIC: Only if he does not --
7 JUDGE ORIE: But we don't have to discuss at this very moment.
8 MR. LUKIC: Only if he does not finish on Friday, but --
9 JUDGE ORIE: We'll discuss it -- but even then, you can't just
10 say other witnesses now will be examined when the Prosecution has not yet
11 cross-examined that witness. You can't just by yourself change the usual
12 order of examination-in-chief, cross-examination, without informing the
13 Chamber and the Prosecution about reasons which the Chamber then will
14 either accept or come up with other suggestions or solutions.
15 Apart from that, Mr. Weber, you may proceed.
16 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honours.
17 Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 30660.
18 Q. Mr. Gengo, I'll now be going through a number of documents that
19 you saw previously in the Karadzic case. The first one is going to be an
20 SRK combat report dated 5 February 1994 at 1600 hours. It is from deputy
21 commander Dragomir Milosevic. I'd like to draw your attention to item 3,
22 the part that states:
23 "First UNPROFOR reports on alleged massacre are that the
24 possible," and this continues on the next page of the English
25 translation, "axis of attack was from the 1st Kosevo pbr's direction."
1 Is it correct that this is not your brigade?
2 A. No, it's not.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That's not correct or is it not your brigade?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That wasn't in our brigade. It's
5 the Kosevo Battalion rather than a brigade. It belonged to the
6 3rd Sarajevo Brigade, judging by the report.
7 MR. WEBER:
8 Q. Is it correct that the 1st Kosevo Infantry Battalion operates in
9 a part of Mrkovici to the west of your zone of responsibility?
10 A. I don't know that and I think it didn't.
11 Q. Well, is it correct that that battalion bordered your zone of
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Is it correct that that battalion occupied a portion of Mrkovici?
15 A. Half of Mrkovici was in my zone of responsibility and another
16 half was in the zone of responsibility of the 1st Kosevo Battalion.
17 Q. The portion of the -- of Mrkovici that belonged to the
18 1st Kosevo Battalion, that was located to the west of your position;
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Is it correct that you do not know of any inspection of mortars
22 operated by the 1st Kosevo Battalion?
23 A. I don't know. I know who came to me, but I don't know who went
24 down there.
25 Q. Could you explain to us the reason that your command would
1 arrange for an investigation of your mortar positions, which according to
2 this document appear to not be suspected of firing the round? Were they
3 trying to mislead UNPROFOR? Is there some other reason?
4 A. I don't know that. I just know that they came to me, they wanted
5 to inspect it, because allegedly that had come from the Mrkovici sector,
6 but they didn't specify from where.
7 Q. Is it correct that there is no reference to any intended visit by
8 a commission in this report? And it does continue on to the second page,
9 so if you need to review that please let us know.
10 A. Can I please have a look at that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, is there any disagreement on what's not
12 in the report.
13 Mr. Lukic, I'm also looking at you because if it doesn't say
14 anything then of course the witness could -- unless you have a reason to
15 believe that the witness reads the document in a different way, and I do
16 not know what your follow-up questions will be, but if it's not in the
17 document --
18 MR. WEBER: I'm going to go through a series of references. I
19 can then just confirm something that the witness said earlier, if that's
20 more efficient. I agree with Your Honour that the document speaks for
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's -- then please proceed.
23 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution tenders 65 ter 30660 at this time.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Document 30660 receives number P6535,
1 Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted.
3 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 1000.
4 MR. LUKIC: 10000 or 1000?
5 MR. WEBER: I'm sorry, 10000. Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
6 Q. Mr. Gengo, this is a letter from General Milovanovic dated 5
7 February 1994. The stamp appears to indicate that it was received by
8 SRNA, the Serbian news agency. I'm going to draw your attention to the
9 middle of the page where it states:
10 "Since the Muslim side is refusing to take part in the work of
11 the mixed expert military commission, the VRS Main Staff is convinced
12 that it has planned and instigated this dreadful massacre."
13 Then toward the end of this letter General Milovanovic states:
14 "The UNPROFOR command refuses to have the UNPROFOR Chief of Staff
15 and the Chief of Staff of the so-called BH Army visit the crime scene
16 together with the VRS Chief of Staff to ascertain the consequences and
17 circumstances of this tragedy."
18 Sir, is it correct that this document shows that the idea of a
19 commission came to a premature end and that there was no commission as
20 you describe?
21 A. Judging by this order, the other side did not accept it so it
22 means that nothing came of it.
23 Q. Sir, is it correct that this document refers not just to the
24 Muslim side but also indicates that UNPROFOR command refuses to
25 participate in this?
1 A. UNPROFOR probably refused to accept because the opposite side,
2 i.e., the Muslim side did not want to do that. They did not have factual
3 evidence and were not willing to face the truth. That was the problem.
4 Because if there was anything, they would gladly have accepted to --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could I stop you. You said "probably refused."
6 What's, apart from your own logic, the reason that you think that this is
7 the probable explanation? Do you know anything about it?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't know. Probably they
9 refused because they didn't have any hard evidence and didn't want to
10 face the truth because the Joint Commission would --
11 JUDGE ORIE: I stopped you because we are not interested in
12 probabilities expressed by you. We're interested in factual knowledge,
13 things you have observed, things you have heard, and not about your
14 opinions about why something may have happened or may not have happened.
15 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
16 MR. LUKIC: I -- when you're finished, Your Honour, if I may, I
17 have to object because the question was not properly posed. It does not
18 say that the command of UNPROFOR rejected --
19 MR. WEBER: Sir, I'm sorry to interrupt. I believe that the
20 witness's headphones are still on.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whatever happened, after my first comment to
22 the witness he continued, he proceeded in --
23 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- the way I just told him not to do. So we leave
25 it to that for the time being.
1 But -- one second, please.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, apparently you are objecting against
4 the --
5 MR. LUKIC: The question.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- question.
7 MR. LUKIC: Yes. In the last paragraph on this page in --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could we ask, first of all, the witness to take off
9 his earphones.
10 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you take off your earphones.
12 MR. LUKIC: It says here that the UNPROFOR command refuses --
13 that the Chief of Staff of UNPROFOR and the Chief of Staff of the
14 so-called Army of B&H together with -- on the next page it says, at least
15 in the version I have, with the Chief of Staff of the Army of
16 Republika Srpska go to the scene of the crime and uncover the
17 consequences and the circumstances of this tragedy.
18 It doesn't say that it was not given to a lower level than the
19 Chief of Staff of UNPROFOR.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Well, that is true. That needs further
21 clarification. I would agree with that. At the same time, it is also
22 true that the document refers not just to the Muslim side but also
23 indicates that UNPROFOR command refuses to participate in the way as
24 described in this document to participate in it. It is a detail, but
25 whatever -- the witness didn't say: Well, it was at a different level.
1 The witness started explaining why they feared the truth, et cetera,
2 et cetera, and that of course is totally beyond the question and would
3 also be totally beyond the question if phrased in a way you would have
4 preferred. Let's leave it to that.
5 Witness, Svedok, could you please put on your earphones again.
6 Mr. Weber, next question, please.
7 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution tenders
8 65 ter 10000 into evidence. The next document I was going to go into was
9 the SRK combat report from the next day, the 6th of February, but I was
10 going to merely ask him about a lack of a reference. It's one of the
11 documents that he saw during the previous testimony. I don't know if
12 Your Honours would just like me [overlapping speakers] --
13 JUDGE ORIE: No, if the parties agree that there is no reference
14 to a certain thing in the document, then we could receive that as
15 evidence, it being a report and the parties agreeing on what's not in the
16 report, the Chamber being able to verify that.
17 Mr. Lukic, any problem?
18 MR. LUKIC: I don't have number here so I cannot even check.
19 MR. WEBER: It's 65 ter 30661.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's -- yes, we first need 65 ter 10000.
21 Madam Registrar, the number would be ... ?
22 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P6536, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
24 Mr. Weber, perhaps you move on. And meanwhile Mr. Lukic looks at
25 whether - as you said I think it was a combat report of the 6th of
1 February, whether there's any dispute about that it is what it says it is
2 and whether there's any dispute about lack of any reference, as you
4 MR. WEBER: Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
6 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have Exhibit 538. This
7 is a large exhibit. If we could go, please, to page 33 of the English
8 original and page 43 of the B/C/S translation.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's a P exhibit?
10 MR. WEBER: Correct, P as in Peter.
11 Q. Sir, coming up before you are the materials from the UNPROFOR
12 investigation following the Markale shelling on 5 February 1994. It's
13 the Prosecution's position that there's not a reference to a commission
14 that you describe in their visit on the 6th of February in these entire
15 documents; however, I do want to go -- I wanted you to understand that
16 and I want to go through a few portions of these documents with you. I'm
17 going to start with the analysis in annex E of this file. In the middle
18 of paragraph 4 it states:
19 [As read] "Colonel Cvetkovic, CO, BSA artillery regiment stated
20 that the Kosevo Brigade has mortar positions (including 120-millimetre
21 mortar) in the Mrkovici area," and then there's a grid reference. "These
22 positions have not been visited by UN personnel" -- if we could have the
23 next page of the B/C/S. Thank you.
24 It continues to state:
25 "These positions have not been visited by UN personnel in at
1 least four months and cannot be located with any accuracy. Since October
2 1993, UNMOs have been denied freedom of movement in this brigade area,
3 although most shots fired from the area can be observed from UNMOs in
4 adjacent areas."
5 And just for efficiency's sake, I want to draw your attention to
6 one more section of these materials and then I'll have a question for
8 MR. WEBER: If we could please have page 45 of the English and
9 page 62 of the B/C/S translation.
10 Q. This will be material from annex G of the investigative file.
11 This is a record of a meeting with the Bosnian Serb representative
12 related to the Markale shelling on 13 February 1994. According to this
13 document that representative was Colonel Cvetkovic. I'd like to direct
14 your attention to the fourth paragraph from the top which is towards the
15 bottom of the page in the B/C/S. It states:
16 "Colonel Cvetkovic then discussed numerous aspects of the
17 incident in theoretical terms and offered his personal opinion concerning
18 the validity of events as portrayed by the media. He had no specific
19 evidence to offer of direct relevance to the investigation ..."
20 My question to you: Do you not find it strange -- strike that.
21 Do you find it strange that the Bosnian Serb representative
22 related to this shelling made no reference to a commission visit or any
23 other inspection on the 6th of February during the course of UNPROFOR's
25 A. He didn't necessarily have to mention that.
1 Q. Sir, he is the -- according to UNPROFOR's materials, he is the
2 representative for the Bosnian Serb side in relation to the Markale
3 shelling. You would agree that is a rather serious event; correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Are you really suggesting to this Trial Chamber that the person
6 who was in charge of representing the Bosnian Serb side would not know of
7 a visit that was relevant to this investigation?
8 A. That was on the 13th of February and they had visited me on the
9 6th of February. There is a difference of seven days from the date when
10 that commission had been formed. Please check out the date.
11 Q. Sir, I'm going to re-ask my question. The reason I'm showing
12 this to you is because it post-dates the visit. Are you really
13 suggesting to this Trial Chamber that the person who was in charge of
14 representing the Bosnian Serb side, Colonel Cvetkovic, would not know of
15 that earlier visit?
16 A. He would have known, but he did not necessarily have to include
17 it in the report. The previous report was sent seven days earlier and
18 there is -- there was no need for it to be mentioned to the mixed
20 Q. When you testified in the Karadzic case, do you recall that the
21 attorney, the Prosecutor at the time, showed you these documents and
22 several more documents related to whether or not the commission you
23 describe existed?
24 A. I don't remember. Can you show them to me?
25 Q. Well, sir, how about this: During the course of being confronted
1 with documents in the Karadzic case, you stated at transcript page 28919
2 to 20:
3 "The commission paid a visit but I cannot remember the exact
5 Is it correct that you do not even know when this commission may
6 have visited you? Do you stand by that previous answer?
7 A. I do know. They came on the 6th.
8 Q. How is it that you did not know in the Karadzic case the exact
9 dates and you are now claiming to know in this case?
10 A. I didn't remember then. I did not establish the necessary link.
11 Even then I said that the visit took place approximately on the 6th or on
12 the 7th and I did not know the exact time. Later on when I dwelled upon
13 it, I remembered that it had been on the 6th.
14 Q. After you were shown a number of materials, the ones I've shown
15 you and a few more reports, you were asked at the Karadzic transcript
16 page 29826 to 27 the following:
17 "Q. I'll wrap-up now, Mr. Witness. I've shown you today a
18 series of documents from which contain records of what was said by
19 Colonel Cvetkovic, by the SRK command, by UNPROFOR, by the president of
20 the republic about this extremely serious incident. Not one of them
21 refers to an inspection of the 120-millimetre mortar gun at Mrkovici on
22 the 6th of February, 1994. Do you agree with that?"
23 Your answer was:
24 "I do."
25 Do you stand by that testimony?
1 A. Please repeat the question.
2 Q. In the Karadzic case you were asked --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to keep matters short.
4 It was put to you in the Karadzic case that none of the documents
5 that were shown to me made reference to an inspection of a 120-millimetre
6 mortar gun at Mrkovici on the 6th of February. In the Karadzic case your
7 answer was that you agreed that no reference in any of these documents
8 was made to such an inspection. Do you still agree that none of the
9 documents refers to it?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree because indeed you can't
11 see such a reference in any of the documents.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
13 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I'm going to move on to a different
14 topic. I don't know if at this time I could re-tender 65 ter 30661, the
15 SRK report from the 6th of February, 1994.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That is SRK regular combat report number 20-15138
17 signed by Dragomir Milosevic dated the 6th of February.
18 Mr. Lukic, any need to put it to the witness just to find out
19 that no reference in this combat report is made to -- I take it also a
20 visit on the 6th of February, an inspection ?
21 MR. LUKIC: As a matter of fact, we will not agree with that.
22 We'll come back to that document with this witness.
23 MR. WEBER: All right. Well, even more reason to have it.
24 MR. LUKIC: I don't have any objections to -- for the document to
25 be admitted.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We -- Madam Registrar, 65 ter 30661 receives
2 number ... ?
3 THE REGISTRAR: Number P6537, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
5 And you'll revisit that document, Mr. Lukic.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
7 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, there were a number of additional
8 materials that were provided to the witness before he gave that answer in
9 the Karadzic case. I am willing to make any of them available to the
10 Trial Chamber or not. I believe the evidence --
11 JUDGE ORIE: If it is merely to establish that none of the
12 documents refers to an inspection on the 6th of February, I think we
13 don't need it because the witness clearly stated that. If there's any
14 other information in those documents which you would like the Chamber to
15 rely upon, then of course something else has to be done.
16 MR. WEBER: Yes, Your Honour, understood.
17 JUDGE ORIE: If it's purely that, there's no need to have it
18 admitted into evidence. Please proceed -- have them admitted into
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. WEBER:
22 Q. Sir, I'm just going to ask a couple basic things in the time we
23 have left today. Starting in February 1995, is it correct that you were
24 assigned to the SRK command and dealt with logistics?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. At that time, Dragomir Milosevic was the commander of the SRK;
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Aleksa Krsmanovic was the assistant commander for logistics; is
5 that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is it correct that you were part of a technical logistics group
8 that was subordinated directly to General Milosevic?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is it correct that that team included
11 Lieutenant-Colonel Milivoj Solar, Captain Momo Tomic -- I'll go through
12 the names?
13 A. Yes, yes, yes.
14 Q. Okay. It also included Lieutenant Dragan Kulina; is that
16 A. Kulina, yes.
17 Q. And with respect to that spelling, is that with a U, Kulina?
18 A. U, U.
19 Q. Is it correct that as part of this team you met with
20 General Milosevic about the logistics in the corps?
21 A. Yes, there was a meeting.
22 Q. You're referring to a meeting in singular. Is it correct that as
23 part of your duties on this team you met with General Milosevic?
24 A. Yes, we did meet occasionally as needed.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'm looking at the clock, it's a quarter past 2.00.
1 Mr. Gengo, we adjourn for the day. I would like to instruct you
2 that you should not speak or communicate in whatever way with whomever
3 about your testimony, whether that is testimony you've given today or
4 whether that is testimony still to be given tomorrow. We'd like to see
5 you back tomorrow morning at 9.30. You may now follow the usher.
6 [The witness stands down]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, according to our time keeping, you have
8 one hour left.
9 We adjourn for the day and we'll resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the
10 28th of May, 9.30 in the morning in this same courtroom, I.
11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.16 p.m.,
12 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 28th day of
13 May, 2014, at 9.30 a.m.