1 Wednesday, 26 November 2014
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
8 IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 I was informed that the Prosecution had a preliminary issue to
11 raise, and that it took so little time that we already could ask the
12 usher to escort the witness into the courtroom.
13 As little as that, Mr. Weber?
14 MR. WEBER: Good morning, Your Honours. Correct.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, I just wanted to follow up on
17 Exhibit P6946 from yesterday, it was the decision forbidding the return
18 of Croats and Muslims from the Ilidza War Commission. According to the
19 document, it was dated 4 April 1993. Yesterday at transcript page 28860
20 the Chamber asked if the parties had any further information that would
21 shed light on the date because at the end of the session there was some
22 confusion about whether it was 1992 or 1993. The Prosecution would note
23 that Exhibit P4906 is the decisions establishing the war commissions, it
24 is dated 10 June 1992. The Prosecution also verified that the second
25 session of the Ilidza War Commission was held on 27 February 1993. Based
1 on this information, it appears clear that P6946 reflects the correct
2 dates in April 1993. Thank you, Your Honours.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE ORIE: That's the position of the Prosecution.
5 If the Defence has anything to add, then we would like to hear
6 from you.
7 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour, we do not dispute this date.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's clear. 1993. The date on that
9 document is the actual date.
10 Good morning, Mr. Mandic. Before you give evidence the Rules
11 require that you make a solemn declaration. May I invite you to make
12 that declaration, of which the text is handed out to you now.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
14 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
15 WITNESS: BOSKO MANDIC
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Lukic.
20 You find Mr. Lukic to your left. Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.
21 Mr. Lukic, please proceed.
22 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Examination by Mr. Lukic:
24 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Mandic.
25 A. Good morning.
1 MR. LUKIC: I would kindly ask the usher to provide the witness
2 with a clean copy of his statement, it's with him, it's checked by the
3 Prosecution. So I just want to inform the Chamber then that the witness
4 has his clean statement in front of him.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Mandic, would you be so kind to tell us for the record your
8 full name?
9 A. Bosko Mandic. Should I go on?
10 Q. Thank you. That's enough. I will occasionally make a pause; it
11 doesn't mean that you should go on speaking, I'm just waiting for
13 MR. LUKIC: Can we have on our screens 1D1630, please.
14 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Mandic, have you given a statement to the
15 Defence team of General Mladic?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you see that statement before you on the screen and in the
18 hard copy?
19 A. Yes, this is my signature.
20 Q. That was my next question.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now look at the last page.
22 Q. Do you see the signature, do you recognise it?
23 A. Yes, it's mine.
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now see page 2 of the
25 statement. I need paragraph 6.
1 Q. Mr. Mandic, you drew my attention to the date written here.
2 Which date should it be?
3 A. It should be 30 April 1992, 30th April.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 A. Welcome.
6 Q. After this correction, are the facts stated in this statement
7 accurate as you told them to the Defence team of General Mladic?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Is the content of the statement accurate and truthful?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. If I were to put to you the same questions today, would you
12 answer the same?
13 A. I believe so, maybe not 100 per cent but ...
14 Q. Overall it would be?
15 A. Yes, overall it would be.
16 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, we would tender this statement into the
18 JUDGE ORIE: In the absence of any objections, Madam Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 1D1630 receives number D826.
20 JUDGE ORIE: D826 is admitted.
21 MR. LUKIC: With your leave, Your Honours, I would read statement
22 summary of this witness. It's not that short, but I will not have any
23 questions for this witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
25 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Mr. Mandic started to work for the Prijedor Municipal Assembly on
2 16th April 1992 when he was appointed vice chairman of the Executive
4 After Slovenia and Croatia had seceded from the SFRY and as the
5 national parties of the HDZ and SDA were established, the Serbian people
6 realised that they had to get politically organised so as not to
7 experience the suffering they had been through during World War II. As
8 the result of these efforts, on 9 January 1992 the Assembly of the
9 Republika Srpska was formed and the Serbian Assembly of Prijedor was
10 established as well.
11 On 29th April 1992, the police in Prijedor intercepted the
12 telegram from Alija Delimustafic and Jerko Doko, the ministers of the
13 interior and defence of the B&H, ordering an attack against the Serbs and
14 the JNA. This pushed Serbs to take over the power in Prijedor on the
15 next day, 30th of April, 1992.
16 Following a peaceful take-over of power in Prijedor, the
17 Council for National Defence decided to set up a Crisis Staff for
18 municipality of Prijedor. Mr. Mandic was a member of this Crisis Staff.
19 After this take-over of power SDS continued to negotiate with the
20 SDA representatives. There were no armed conflicts after this take-over
21 until Muslim forces attacked military conscripts in Hambarine on 22nd of
22 May and military convoy in Kozarac two days later. On the 30th of May,
23 1992, Muslim forces attacked town of Prijedor. This resulted in war
24 operations on the whole territory of the Prijedor municipality.
25 At the same time a war broke out across B&H territory. The
1 situation in Prijedor municipality was affected by the large number of
2 Serbs -- Serb refugees coming from the towns that had already been taken
3 in the Muslim-controlled areas in Bihac, Krupa, Sarajevo, Zenica, Tuzla,
4 as well as from Croatia. The situation was very tense. At the same time
5 Prijedor area had been cut off from Serbia and Montenegro and eastern
6 parts of Republika Srpska.
7 All those non-Serbs who did not violate the law, did not possess
8 weapons, and decided to leave Prijedor town were helped by the local
9 authorities during this process. This departure was made possible and
10 organised through the Red Cross in Prijedor and International Red Cross.
11 All the persons who took part in combat and had illegal weapons
12 and military equipment had to be interviewed and investigated. At some
13 point the decision was taken to organise this in Omarska because of the
14 facilities it afforded.
15 Curfew was introduced for all citizens. The telephone lines of
16 all the citizens of Prijedor were disconnected. At the same time, there
17 was a shortage of electricity in the entire Republika Srpska, including
18 the municipality of Prijedor.
19 Following the take-over of power, as the name suggests, the
20 Muslim and Croat cadres in the Prijedor Municipal Assembly lost power.
21 All the others kept their jobs.
22 The problem was that some of the Muslims and Croats refused to
23 support Republika Srpska which was only in the making, were not loyal to
24 it either, and did not report for work. After the lapse of a specific
25 number of days, they had to be dismissed under the pain of law and
1 replaced by the others in order for the service in question to continue
3 And this was the statement summary.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
5 Mr. Mandic, just to -- these were -- you have no further
6 questions for the witness?
7 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour, I do not have further questions for
8 this witness.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, just for your understanding that doesn't
10 mean that there's no further evidence before since no further questions
11 are put to you. The evidence you have given is in the statement which is
12 now admitted into evidence, and you'll now be cross-examined by
13 Mr. Tieger or Mr. -- Mr. Tieger.
14 You'll find Mr. Tieger to your right. Mr. Tieger is counsel for
15 the Prosecution.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, if I can have the
17 interpretation a bit louder, please.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The usher will assist you in increasing the
19 volume. Does this help?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, if you're ready, please proceed.
22 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Tieger:
24 Q. Mr. Mandic, let's begin with the last point covered in the
25 summary by Mr. Lukic. In paragraph 41 of your statement you assert that
1 "stepping down," that is, removal from positions following the take-over
2 of power by Serb authorities, "had to do with respect for the
3 constitution and law and not with ethnicity."
4 Mr. Mandic, the reality is that there were, in fact, explicit
5 decisions that were grounded on ethnicity, providing that only personnel
6 of Serbian ethnicity could hold executive and other posts; isn't that
8 A. How shall I put it? It's partly correct, and I can explain.
9 Q. Well, perhaps you can explain it in the context of a document
10 that, in fact, reflects such a decision.
11 MR. TIEGER: If we could call up 65 ter 3304, please.
12 Q. As we can see on the screen in front of you, this is a document
13 dated the 22nd of June, 1992, reflecting a decision by the Crisis Staff
14 of the Autonomous Region of Krajina, that:
15 "Only personnel of Serbian ethnicity may hold executive posts,
16 posts where the information flow is possible and the protection of
17 socially owned property, that is, all posts of importance for the
18 functioning of economic entities."
19 MR. TIEGER: And if we can turn to page 3 of the English, please,
20 and page 2 of the Serbian.
21 Q. We see a document from the very next day, the --
22 JUDGE ORIE: We do not have the B/C/S --
23 MR. TIEGER: Page 2. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
25 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. This is a document dated the very next day, the 23rd of June,
2 1992, signed by Milomir Stakic, the president of the Prijedor
3 Crisis Staff, forwarding the decision we just looked at for
4 implementation. Now, that's the reality of the situation at the time,
5 isn't it, Mr. Mandic, unreflected in your statement to this Court?
6 A. Excuse me, to whom was this sent?
7 Q. Now, Mr. Mandic, you were on the Crisis Staff at the time, were
8 you not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. The chronology, as you can clearly see it, is that the ARK
11 Crisis Staff made a decision on the 22nd of June, grounded on ethnicity;
12 it was received by Prijedor within 24 hours; the Prijedor Crisis Staff,
13 of which you were a member, made a decision that they should forward that
14 decision of the ARK Crisis Staff, that ethnically based decision for
15 termination, so that it would be implemented. Isn't that the reality?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
17 MR. LUKIC: Yes. If we can see the first page, and I think it
18 would be only fair to read the third paragraph from point 1 to the
19 witness --
20 JUDGE ORIE: You can do so -- if there's anything I'll have a
21 look at it.
22 And, Mr. Tieger, if there's unfairness in it, you'll certainly be
23 aware of it, otherwise the matter can be dealt with in re-examination.
24 MR. LUKIC: Still, I would like to have the first page in front
25 of the witness so he can --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you are not examining the witness at this
2 moment, Mr. Lukic. But I'll have a look at it, and you are drawing my
3 attention to the first page and then --
4 MR. LUKIC: Point 1, paragraph 3, under the point 1.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Point 1, paragraph 3. One second, please.
6 MR. TIEGER: I was going to cover that, Mr. President --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
8 MR. TIEGER: -- and it specifically.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Please proceed then and we'll wait. Please
11 MR. TIEGER:
12 Q. Mr. Mandic, you've had a chance to see the ARK Crisis Staff
13 decision, you've had a chance to see the Prijedor Crisis Staff decision,
14 forwarding that for implementation. That's a reflection of the fact that
15 terminations were based on ethnicity and not, as you say in your
16 statement, not based on ethnicity at all but on respect for the
17 constitution. Isn't that the reality of the situation at the time?
18 A. We know that the Serbian Democratic Party took over power. It's
19 logical that it appointed and removed senior personnel. Where somebody
20 would be appointed, the SDS would decide. Where employees didn't show up
21 for work, decisions were made to dismiss them and other people were
22 appointed in their place. I think that's only logical. There were
23 employees who were not disturbed in any way because they continued to be
24 loyal to the existing laws. They accepted things and of course -- for
25 instance, we had a business with 500 employees called GIK Mrakovica where
1 Mr. Ibro, a man of Muslim faith, continued to be the manager. But it
2 would be logical for the public security station or the army to replace
3 staff and make new appointments.
4 Q. Now, Mr. --
5 A. -- and of course -- I just want to emphasise one more thing, if
6 you allow me. We did not enforce this decision blindly. There were
7 senior staff who were not Serbs but continued in their positions.
8 Q. Mr. Mandic, that was an elaborate explanation of the "logic" that
9 you claim underpinned termination decisions. But this decision or these
10 two decisions don't describe that at all. They have a categorical
11 provision based on ethnicity and that decision was made by the ARK
12 Crisis Staff, received by the Prijedor Crisis Staff, and sent for
13 implementation by the Prijedor Crisis Staff. That is true, correct?
14 A. Yes, according to this paper. But on the ground it wasn't like
16 MR. TIEGER: I tender 3304, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 3304 receives number P6948.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
20 MR. TIEGER:
21 Q. Mr. Lukic was interested in the third paragraph of provision 1.
22 You emphasise in your statement that only the issue of respect for
23 constitution as a bench-mark for terminations, but the reality,
24 Mr. Mandic, as reflected in the ARK Crisis Staff decision was that it was
25 loyalty and fidelity to the party that was the bench-mark for
1 terminations, not loyalty to the constitution. And isn't that what the
2 first provision in this decision reflects? That's the last paragraph of
3 the first part of that decision. It's about loyalty to the party, isn't
4 it, and the decision that posts cannot be held by people who haven't
5 accepted that the SDS is the only representative for the Serbian people?
6 A. That pertained to Serbs.
7 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do we understand that non-Serbs who were loyal to
9 the SDA [sic] would be excluded from this provision.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand that question.
11 It's somehow complicated.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's not complicated. You've just told us that
13 the last paragraph of provision 1 relates to the Serbs only, and I'm
14 saying -- and you have just told us also that there was a man who headed
15 a company who was a non-Serb because he was loyal. Now I'm saying: Does
16 this last paragraph exclude non-Serbs who are loyal to the SDA -- SDS?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There weren't any such persons in
18 the SDS.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, you've told us of a person who retained his
20 job as a manager of a company who was non-Serb.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: And didn't he -- and why was he retained in his
23 job when everybody else who was non-Serb was dismissed?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, he was loyal to the
25 then-authorities. He was not a member of the party. He did not exhibit
1 any extreme tensions and of course thereby he remained in that position.
2 That was the reason. Had there been anything, he certainly would have
3 been prosecuted. He kept his job, he supported the then-government, so
4 why would he not stay?
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the then-government and the then-authority was
6 the SDS government, wasn't it?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, certainly.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: So he was loyal to the SDS and its government?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, he wasn't a member of the
10 SDS --
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not saying --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- but he was loyal to the
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not saying he was a member, I'm saying he's
15 loyal. You have just told us. He was loyal [Overlapping speakers] --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To the government, to the
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, absolutely. You said everybody who was loyal
19 to the then-authorities would be covered by this, but he must be Serb.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To tell you the truth, I did not
21 look at his birth certificate. You can tell who is who on the basis of a
22 name, but you cannot really go in-depth that much.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: You have told this Chamber that that person was a
24 non-Serb. Whether or not you had looked at his birth certificate, you
25 know him to be a non-Serb.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: So you are not able to answer my question? My
3 question, if I must remind you: Does this paragraph, the last paragraph
4 of provision 1, not include non-Serbs, yes or no?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
7 Thank you, Mr. Tieger.
8 MR. TIEGER:
9 Q. Mr. Mandic, you -- this is not the first time you've testified
10 before a Chamber in this institution. You testified in the Karadzic case
11 as well; correct?
12 A. Yes, yes.
13 Q. And in your testimony in the Karadzic case, you referred to the
14 fact that as vice chairman of the Executive Board you did not travel to
15 Banja Luka unlike other Prijedor officials; correct?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. It was the responsibility, as you testified, of the president of
18 the municipality and other Prijedor representatives to go to Banja Luka
19 for meetings of the ARK Crisis Staff; right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And the Prijedor authorities implemented the decisions of the ARK
22 Crisis Staff, as we have already seen from the document we've previously
23 examined; correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. All right. Let me show you another example of that.
1 MR. TIEGER: If we could call up 65 ter 17422, please.
2 Q. This is a document dated the 22nd of May, 1992, sent by the
3 Prijedor Crisis Staff to all commercial and social enterprises, in
4 accordance, as the document states, with the decision of the Crisis Staff
5 of the Autonomous Region of Krajina, imposing permanent operational duty
6 in all the municipalities of the ARK, and that's an example of Prijedor's
7 implementation of the decisions of the ARK Crisis Staff as you mentioned
8 a moment ago; correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. TIEGER: I tender this document, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours 17422 receives number P6949.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
14 MR. TIEGER:
15 Q. Mr. Mandic, in paragraph 6 of your statement you refer to the
16 "peaceful" take-over of power in Prijedor, what you have corrected to be
17 the 30th of April, 1992. Now, I want to clarify first that when,
18 although you say "peaceful," that means nothing more than no bloodshed.
19 It does not mean no force. It was a forcible take-over; correct? That
20 is, the Serbs occupied buildings with armed personnel -- physically
21 occupied those buildings?
22 A. That was done by the police, milicija, that is to say the public
23 security station. They took over these facilities.
24 Q. And in paragraph 9 you state that that take-over was the result
25 of intercepted telegrams that caused "panic" among police and citizens.
1 Now, in actual fact, Mr. Mandic, the take-over of Prijedor by the Bosnian
2 Serb authorities was planned and preparatory actions were being put in
3 place well before those telegrams; isn't that the truth?
4 A. First of all, I mean, I am not a Bosnian Serb. I'm a Serb from
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina. I'm offended as a person if somebody says "Bosnian
6 Serb" or "Bosnian" to me. I'm a Serb from Bosnia-Herzegovina and my
7 religion is Orthodox Christianity. I'm sorry for this reaction, but I
8 really had to.
9 JUDGE ORIE: When and where were you addressed as a Bosnian Serb
10 being a witness here? I saw that -- I heard Mr. Tieger --
11 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- talking at the Bosnian Serb authorities.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: He didn't address you in any way in person. So
15 would you please answer the question rather than complain about the
16 language used which was not directly related to you.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do apologise. That was my
18 understanding and that is why I reacted. I apologise if it wasn't
19 addressed to me.
20 As for a response to this question, it was logical that as the
21 SDA and the HDZ were preparing to take over Bosnia and Herzegovina, the
22 SDS worked on the ground, and of course they talked to these two parties
23 all the time as well so that the problem of Prijedor and
24 Bosnia-Herzegovina could be resolved by peaceful means. We offered all
25 sorts of options, even a joint police force including Serbs and
1 non-Serbs, mixed patrols and so on. However, when this telegram arrived
2 then a decision was made to take-over authority in Prijedor in a
3 non-violent way.
4 MR. TIEGER:
5 Q. Mr. Mandic, your statement indicates that the cause and effect of
6 the Prijedor was, A, the telegram that was intercepted or the two
7 telegrams that were intercepted; and thereafter a reaction, an immediate
8 reaction, a panicky reaction by the police. There is no mention
9 whatsoever of any preparatory steps or any prior decision to implement
10 the take-over in Prijedor. Now, first of all, are you acknowledging to
11 this Court now that there were -- that there was a prior decision, that
12 is, before those telegrams were sent and intercepted to take over-power,
13 and that steps were taken to implement that decision before the receipt
14 of those telegrams, yes or no?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Well, you admitted that when you were testifying in the Karadzic
17 case. I'm going to turn you to that testimony now, sir.
18 MR. TIEGER: If we could turn to 65 ter 31659, page 9.
19 Q. You were asked about this same issue because you raised it in
20 your Karadzic statement as well, and you were confronted with the
21 fact - and I can read you all this verbatim but let's see first if my
22 description of what happened in the Karadzic case jogs your recollection.
23 You were first confronted with a fact at page 9 in the e-court that the
24 Serb authorities had been preparing the take-over long before the 29th of
25 April. You provided a fairly elaborate answer similar to the one you did
2 "We were aware of the time that we lived in. We were aware of
3 the history ... we knew that the representatives of the SDA ... had
4 decided to take over the entire Bosnia-Herzegovina ...," you referred to
5 World War II.
6 Then you were asked:
7 "Well, then, do you agree ... that the SDS was preparing the
8 take-over ... long before receiving the Telex?"
9 MR. TIEGER: Turn to the next page, please.
10 Q. And again, you said: Well, we had to organise ourselves in one
11 way or another. You were then confronted with a Prijedor SJB report,
12 which was P2968 in the Karadzic case, as reflected here, and is --
13 MR. TIEGER: For the benefit of counsel and Your Honours, P3948
14 in this case.
15 Q. -- a document which reflects that activities were launched to
16 prepare for a take-over by force. These activities gained momentum in
17 April. It refers to the "very detailed preparations" and talks about the
18 role of 400 policemen in carrying out the take-over.
19 And then you were asked:
20 "Now as this police report makes clear, this take-over by the SDS
21 in Prijedor was planned long before the Telex was received on the 29th of
22 April; correct?"
23 MR. TIEGER: That's at the bottom of page 10 in the e-court.
24 Q. And at the top of page 11 in e-court, you say:
25 "Yes. But this was not the only reason. I mean, the Cazin
2 So in the Karadzic case you acknowledged that the take-over by
3 the SDS in Prijedor was planned long before the Telex was received; isn't
4 that correct?
5 A. Well, it's very questionable what that means, a lot earlier, long
6 before, it could be a month or more or five years or whatever. When --
7 JUDGE ORIE: How --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- the Municipal Assembly could not
9 have been established --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you there. You're asking questions
11 yourself rather than answering them, but tell us how long before was it
12 that it was prepared?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think it was from the
14 beginning of April when a member of a Serb wedding party was killed in
15 Sarajevo, that that became intensified then, and what was discussed was
16 what would happen if something like that would happen in Prijedor. But
17 it was the telegram that initiated this.
18 I apologise. And everything else I said when I testified in the
19 case of President Karadzic, those reasons are also the ones that led to
20 the take-over on the 30th of April, 1992.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So it -- you said there were more reasons. The
22 issue raised by Mr. Tieger simply is, in paragraph 9 of your statement
23 you give a picture that a telegram triggered everything, whereas - as you
24 tell us now - a month before you were already thinking about how to
25 prepare, et cetera. Isn't that true?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the testimony provided in
2 Mr. Karadzic's case shows that I confirmed that, so here in my statement
3 it is abbreviated, it's two sentences only. I did not say why and on
4 account of what, et cetera. The telegram was the one that led to this
5 happening in the municipality of Prijedor, so there.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So it's not the whole truth? It's part of the
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, nobody asked me to describe
9 what had happened earlier.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You gave a picture as if it was all triggered by the
11 telegram. You're now telling us that events before played a role as well
12 and you testified in a similar way in the Karadzic case, so you must have
13 been aware that that is relevant information, isn't it?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course, and I confirmed that on
15 the basis of conversations. I didn't hide anything. This is what led to
16 the decision for the take-over.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We leave it to that, and I remind you that you are
18 supposed to tell the whole truth and not just part of it.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President. So I don't run afoul of
21 the Court's schedule, is it -- okay. Fine.
22 Q. Similarly, Mr. Mandic, in paragraph 6 you state that the
23 Crisis Staff was established or set up after the take-over. And that's
24 not true either, is it? The Crisis Staff existed in Prijedor before the
25 take-over, didn't it?
1 A. No.
2 MR. TIEGER: Can we have P3779, please.
3 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, only my colleague would be specific,
4 which Crisis Staff he asked --
5 JUDGE ORIE: If there are more Crisis Staffs --
6 MR. LUKIC: There are.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- then, Mr. Lukic, you took a statement, then I
8 take it that you would have created clarity in this respect.
9 MR. LUKIC: I was describing the Crisis Staff this gentleman was
10 a member of.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Which one?
12 MR. LUKIC: It is -- I don't want to interfere with the
13 questions, only there are more Crisis Staffs.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
15 Then the question to the witness: Was there a Crisis Staff,
16 perhaps another one, created before the 30th of April?
17 MR. TIEGER: Well, if I can just intervene slightly.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. TIEGER: I don't consider that to be a precisely fair
20 intervention. The question was clear I was asking about the Prijedor
21 Crisis Staff. Now that intervention is clearly an interpretive queue for
22 the witness. It's not -- it doesn't clarify an ambiguous question. The
23 question is about whether or not the Prijedor Crisis Staff existed. The
24 witness is in a position to answer that question.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic --
1 MR. LUKIC: The Crisis Staff [Overlapping speakers] --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, Mr. Lukic, the Crisis Staff the witness
3 is talking about in paragraph 6. He was taken to paragraph 6 and the
4 question is put to him whether the Crisis Staff --
5 MR. LUKIC: The Crisis Staff [Overlapping speakers] --
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- which refers to the Crisis Staff he is talking
7 about in paragraph 6 to set up a Crisis Staff in order to more easily
9 Witness, was the Crisis Staff you're talking about in paragraph 6
10 established after the take-over or was it established at any earlier
11 point in time? You are -- you're reading from the screen. As a matter
12 of fact, we'd like to hear your answer first rather than to read from the
13 screen. Was the Crisis Staff you are talking about in paragraph 6
14 established before the 30th of April?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, no, I mean the Crisis Staff
16 of the Serb municipality of Prijedor, it was established after the 30th
17 of April, that is to say on the basis of the law.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, Mr. Lukic, I think --
19 MR. LUKIC: We have documents on this. It's not in dispute I
20 think at all. I can tell you the exact dates.
21 JUDGE ORIE: That's the --
22 MR. LUKIC: I had a whole case on the Crisis Staff in Prijedor.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, it's about reliability and credibility of
24 the witness.
25 MR. LUKIC: Exactly, that's why I'm trying to have a fair
1 question for this witness.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The question was fair.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. TIEGER:
5 Q. On the screen in front of you, Mr. Mandic, is P3779, a document
6 dated the 23rd of April, 1992, among other things it refers in point 5 to
7 "... working on the take-over, co-ordination with the JNA
8 notwithstanding." And in points 2 and 3 it refers to the fact that:
9 "All units and staff in management posts shall be responsible and
10 subordinate to the Crisis Staff in this area."
11 And point 3:
12 "To reinforce the Crisis Staff according to speciality."
13 Now, that's a reflection of the existence of the Crisis Staff on
14 at least April 23rd, 1992, is it not?
15 A. I really don't know when this Crisis Staff was established. I
16 mean, in 1991 I didn't live in Prijedor, in Bosnia-Herzegovina at all.
17 This is certainly organisation on the ground by the SDS; that is to say,
18 Crisis Staffs were established and local committees because the other
19 sides did that too in order, I mean, to get information on the ground.
20 Well, that would be it, my answer, because -- well, the Crisis Staff --
21 perhaps the person who wrote this was taking notes. I don't remember
22 officially a Crisis Staff as an institution.
23 Q. But you attended this meeting; right?
24 A. Yes, yes. But I really don't know if there was a Crisis Staff
25 when it was established. As for what I know, I know that the Serb
1 municipality of Prijedor was established on the 9th of January, but then
2 a Crisis Staff and who was on this Crisis Staff and who was the main
3 person there?
4 Q. All right. I'm going to be getting into that in some greater
5 detail in a moment, but since we're just a couple of minutes from the
6 break, perhaps it's better to pick it up fresh when we resume.
7 JUDGE ORIE: We'll take the break now and, Witness, we'd like to
8 see you back in 20 minutes.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
10 [The witness stands down]
11 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at ten minutes to 11.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.
13 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We're waiting for the witness to be escorted into
15 the courtroom.
16 [The witness takes the stand]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
18 MR. TIEGER:
19 Q. Mr. Mandic, in connection with the establishment of the
20 Crisis Staff and the take-over, I wanted to call up a number of documents
21 that shed light on both of those issues. And the first one I'd like to
22 call up is P3038, a document the Court will be familiar with.
23 Mr. Mandic, these are the instructions for the organisation and
24 operation of organs of the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina in
25 emergency conditions, dated the 19th of December, 1991, often referred to
1 as the Variant A and B document. It provides for measures and tasks in
2 connection with municipalities where the Serbian people constitute a
3 majority, that's Variant A; and in those municipalities where the Serbian
4 people do not constitute a majority, that is Variant B. And it's broken
5 down into different into two different levels or phases or steps, level 1
6 and level 2. So, first of all, let me ask you if you claim to be
7 familiar with this document?
8 A. May I answer? In 1991 I was not in Bosnia-Herzegovina at all.
9 In fact, it was the former Yugoslavia still and I never held this
10 document in my hands. I never read it.
11 Q. All right. We're going to track this document and Prijedor in a
12 moment, but first let me ask you to confirm a very basic proposition in
13 connection with issue of Serb majority or Serb minority municipalities.
14 It's correct that in 1991 Prijedor had about 112.500 people, of whom a
15 little over 49.000 were Muslims and -- well, 49.350 were Muslims and
16 47.580 were Serbs with smaller groups of -- smaller other groups;
18 A. I think it was correct under the census.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, could I seek clarification of one of the
20 previous answers.
21 You said you never held this document in your hands, you never
22 read it. You never read it in your whole life or did you intend to say
23 that you didn't read it in 1991 or early 1992?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not active at that time in
25 the sense of receiving any documentation and in 1991 I was not --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, that was not my question, whether you were
2 active or not. My simple question is whether you ever in your life read
3 this document?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember. I can't answer
5 this question. I don't remember.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put another question to the witness?
8 You said:
9 "In 1991 I was not in Bosnia-Herzegovina at all. In fact, it was
10 the former Yugoslavia still..."
11 When did you return to the former Yugoslavia or
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that was just before the
14 new year, 1992, the 24th or 25th December. I was working in Germany and
15 there are witnesses who can testify where I was.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In your statement, paragraph 3, you say:
17 "I stayed in Germany for about a year and returned to Prijedor in
18 late 1991."
19 I just want to clarify what is late 1991, you are saying now 24th
20 or 25th December.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, yes.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
23 MR. TIEGER: If we could call up P3773, please.
24 Q. Now, what you'll see coming up on the screen next, Mr. Mandic, is
25 a document about eight days later from the 27th of December, 1991, a
1 meeting of the Prijedor Municipal Boards, and as we look down the page we
2 can see that President Miskovic, the president of the SDS Municipal
3 Board, read out the instructions forwarded to the Prijedor SDS by the
4 Assembly of the Serbian People, referred to the two versions but noted
5 that only version II, which in context I take to be version -- Variant B
6 which was relevant for Prijedor was read out. And then having read them
7 out, he explained what had been done so far with respect to the
8 instructions. And as we look further down the page we see the reference
9 to the reasons and functions being stated for the establishment of the
10 municipal Crisis Staff and local staffs on the territory of the
11 municipality. Turning the page in English but remaining on the same page
12 in B/C/S, we see the decision to introduce around-the-clock duty in SDS
13 offices. We note in point 2 that the composition of the Crisis Staff is
14 identified. And finally that a session of the Assembly of the Serbian
15 people was scheduled.
16 Now, Mr. Mandic, either at that time or at some point later when
17 you took a more active part in the organs of the Serbian people in
18 Prijedor, were you made aware of the fact that the Prijedor Serbian
19 authorities, the SDS, had received the Variant A and B instructions and
20 was implementing them, including by establishing a Crisis Staff?
21 A. Yes. I joined in later and I remember individual people
22 advocated various things. For instance, late Mirko Sarac was in charge
23 of economic affairs and I talked to him mostly about the economy. At any
24 rate, there were some people but I really didn't know who was in charge
25 of what exactly and --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, witness --
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- it's true the Crisis Staff was
3 established at that time but I didn't immediately --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. After a few lines you come to an answer to
5 the question. Why not do that directly? But it's only the second part
6 of the question. Had you become aware then that the Prijedor Serbian
7 authorities, the SDS, had received the Variant A and B instructions?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, certainly I was not aware of
9 it, but it's obvious that it's a fact. The document speaks to it.
10 There's no reason for me to --
11 JUDGE ORIE: No, there's only one reason for you: That is, to
12 answer the question. You say you were not aware, then the simple answer
13 is: No, I was not aware.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. TIEGER:
16 Q. Mr. Mandic, this Chamber has received evidence that on the 14th
17 of February, 1992, Dr. Karadzic at a large extended meeting of the
18 Executive and Main Boards and municipality presidents and so on activated
19 the second level of Variant A and B, referring to it four times and
20 concluding by -- let me --
21 MR. TIEGER: And this is P3774.
22 Q. Concluding by saying:
23 "That's why we called you today, to intensify, to introduce the
24 second level and to intensify the functioning of the government at any
25 cost and on every single millimetre of our territory."
1 That was not so long before you say you became vice-president of
2 the Executive Committee. Were you made aware of the fact that the second
3 level of Variant A and B had been activated by the president of the SDS
4 in mid-February?
5 A. If I was at some meeting, this must have been shown to me; I
6 mean, a meeting of the Municipal Board of the SDS. Now, whether I
7 remember what Radovan Karadzic said or not, I'm not sure, but I was
8 informed if I attended that meeting. If there is a document about it, I
9 accept it.
10 Q. Well, let me turn in that case to 65 ter 15948.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, if I can kindly ask that the
12 English translation be released in e-court.
13 MR. TIEGER:
14 Q. As we can now all see, Mr. Mandic, this is a document dated the
15 17th of February, 1992, three days after the activation of level 2 by
16 Dr. Karadzic. It's a meeting of the SDS Prijedor Municipal Board. And
17 the first speaker was Mr. Miskovic, the president of the SDS
18 Municipal Board, who gave a briefing on the meeting held in Sarajevo, and
19 describes it beginning with his description that Mr. Karadzic was the
20 main speaker. And if we look further down the page and turn to page --
21 and you'll see it, sir, on page 2 of the B/C/S, about six lines -- six,
22 seven lines down, Mr. Miskovic informs the attendees as he's debriefing
23 them on the meeting that in view of all that he's described and all that
24 Dr. Karadzic explained, "it is necessary to activate the second stage of
25 the position stated by the SDS BH Main Board ..."
1 And he goes on to explain what that means.
2 MR. TIEGER: And that would be reflected on page 3 of the B/C/S
3 and page 2 of the English. That is not the correct page 2. I'm not sure
4 what that reflects.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That was the previous document.
6 MR. TIEGER: Yeah. There, it's about six lines down where
7 Mr. Miskovic explains:
8 "It is necessary for us to establish control in our territories."
9 Q. And finally, Mr. Mandic, if we turn to the next page in English
10 and I believe page 4 in the B/C/S but we'll look at both pages, you'll
11 see your name mentioned in between Mr. Coric's intervention and
12 Mr. Drljaca's comments, you'll see the name "Mandic."
13 So, Mr. Mandic, does this refresh your recollection about being
14 present at a meeting when Prijedor's -- when the discussion about the
15 activation of the second level of Variant A and B was made known to the
16 relevant Prijedor authorities and the implementation discussed?
17 A. Yes, I was present, indubitably, and the transcript confirms it.
18 But to tell you the truth what A and B means -- I mean, plan A is a bit
19 lighter -- I mean, I would have to read it. It was such a long time ago.
20 I need to see what's written in that plan B, but it involves certainly
21 organisation, monitoring on the terrain, on the ground, some kind of
22 preparation because it's obvious we knew that the war was coming, it
23 never spared us and it wasn't going to spare us that time and it's not
24 going to spare us the next time.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, Mr. Mandic, Mr. Mandic, Mr. Mandic, I don't
1 think it is necessary for you -- it's not necessary to read the document.
2 I think what Mr. Tieger is -- the point he's making is that you attended
3 this meeting before the 30th of April, 1992, where the establishment of a
4 Crisis Staff is being discussed. So if -- do you agree with him on that?
5 Thank you so much.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I agree, if that's the
8 MR. TIEGER: And I tender that document, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, document with 65 ter number 15948
11 receives number P6950.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
13 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
14 Q. Mr. Mandic, you mentioned a moment ago that you would be
15 interested in looking at portions of the Variant A and B document. Let
16 me turn your attention then to a few pertinent portions, if I may.
17 MR. TIEGER: So if we can call back P3038.
18 Q. And as Mr. Miskovic did on December 27th, I'll turn my attention
19 to Variant B, the relevant part of this document as far as Prijedor is
20 concerned, that begins on page 6. And at page 7 of the English and also
21 page 7 of the B/C/S, we see references at points 5 to "carrying out
22 preparations for the establishment of municipal government organs (the
23 Executive Committee, administration organs ...," et cetera.
24 And reference to "preparing the take-over of the staff and some
25 of the equipment of security services centres and their integration with
1 the public security station ..."
2 And then turning to the second level on page 9 of the English and
3 pages 8 and 9 of the B/C/S, we see the following. The first provides
5 "Convene a session of the Serbian Municipal Assembly and
6 establish a municipal Executive Committee, establish municipal government
7 organs ...," et cetera.
8 "2. Mobilise all Serbian police forces and gradually
9 resubordinate them in co-ordination with JNA commands and staffs."
10 "4. Organise round the clock physical security and of all public
11 buildings of vital interest, transport, and communications," et cetera.
12 Now, those provisions I just read out to you, Mr. Mandic,
13 describe the take-over; correct?
14 A. Not at that moment, but on the 30th of April -- I mean, you can't
15 just take over power by coming there without having personnel ready who
16 will sit there giving them instructions how to act --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, would you carefully listen to the question.
18 Mr. Tieger did not put to you that at that point in time the take-over
19 was a fact, but he says that what is described here as the second level
20 in effect is a description of a take-over, whether you agree with that.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree, I agree. I understood it
23 MR. TIEGER: Thanks, Your Honour.
24 Q. And to press a bit further, that's what happened in Prijedor and
25 the take-over in Prijedor on April 30th, as I believe you just alluded
1 to, was pursuant to the second level of Variant A and B; correct?
2 A. Correct, that's written here.
3 MR. TIEGER: If we could call 65 ter 31663, please.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, again, the answer "that's written here."
5 What is written there, did that -- was that performed, executed
6 on the 30th of April?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 Perhaps you could move slightly back from the microphone, so as
10 to avoid any further interference.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. TIEGER:
13 Q. Mr. Mandic, I've just called up the abridged minutes of the
14 5th Session of the Serbian municipality of Prijedor held on the 16th of
15 April, 1992. It reflects the nomination of Executive Committee members
16 and so on, as we see on the first page. And as we see on the second
17 page, we see the election of the following people, including yourself.
18 So there's you, Mr. Mandic, as the Executive Committee deputy chairman;
19 Mr. Budimir, the National Defence secretary; Mr. Drljaca, the chief of
20 the SJB; Mr. Kuruzovic, the TO staff commander, and so on among the many
21 offices planned. And again, these reflect steps taken shortly before and
22 in anticipation of the take-over to come; correct?
23 A. Correct.
24 MR. TIEGER: I tender that document, please.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, document 31663 receives number
3 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
4 MR. TIEGER: And if I could have 65 ter 10845, please.
5 Q. Mr. Mandic, this is a dispatch from Simo Drljaca to the
6 Banja Luka CSB dated the 30th of April, 1992. He notes that:
7 "In accordance with the conclusions of the Executive Board,
8 the ... control was seized over the SJBs and all other major
9 facilities ..."
10 And he also refers to the fact that ten police stations and 1.587
11 policemen were mobilised."
12 Now, the mobilisation of the policemen is a reflection - and I
13 can refer you back to the document, but since we've referred specifically
14 to it just moments earlier - a reflection of the second -- but point 2 of
15 this second level of the Variant B in the Variant A and B document,
16 correct? And that's what Mr. Drljaca is referring to and that's what was
17 executed by him. Sorry, I just wanted you to confirm that the
18 reference --
19 A. Yes, yes, he acted upon this.
20 Q. Okay. Thank you.
21 MR. TIEGER: And I tender that document.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, document 10845 receives number
25 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. Mr. Mandic, let me turn to a different aspect of your statement.
3 In paragraphs 43 through 44 you emphasise that there was no contact with
4 the authorities in Pale for "several months after the war started." Now,
5 I take it that means from the beginning of April 1992 until sometime in
6 the summer; is that right?
7 A. I would like to ask the following: I had this question -- this
8 kind of question put to me during the case of President Karadzic, and I
9 really could not recall the time, was it April, May, June. But then we
10 reached the following: Information was received from Pale in the AR
11 Krajina, but the time of the attack on Prijedor and the breakthrough of
12 the corridor, I mean that period remained without any functioning.
13 Q. Well, let's break it down and let's focus on -- first on what you
14 remember right now and what you're in a position to tell this Chamber
15 right now. So first of all, let's start with the easy part: And that is
16 when the break in communication that you claim began, when you claim it
17 began. And I take it from your statement you're referring to the
18 beginning of the war and the nature of the problems, that means the
19 beginning of April 1992; right?
20 A. No, I'm referring to the time in Prijedor. I wasn't looking at
21 all of Bosnia-Herzegovina here in my answer. When there was no
22 electricity, when communications were down because of war operations in
23 the Prijedor municipality, that's the period I mean that we had no
24 communication, otherwise we had normal communication. I think up until
25 the 15th of May, 20th of May, and then I think there was no communication
1 until the corridor was established, and I'm referring to Pale.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And when was the corridor established in your
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 28th of June, 1992. I was
5 there so ...
6 JUDGE ORIE: So you're talking about a period earliest 15th of
7 May, latest 28th of June?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's not several months, that's one month and a
10 half, isn't it, at its best?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, when I was writing I wasn't
12 paying attention but that's it. I mean, I wasn't paying attention to
13 this, what a month or two meant. I mean, I'm not a lawyer so quite
14 simply I write -- well, it wasn't my wish to do anything wrong in any
15 sense. It just so happened that -- well, two months, a couple of months.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I accept that I made a mistake, I
19 JUDGE ORIE: You attested to it after having read it again, if I
20 understand you well, and it's not the first time now that you are
21 correcting yourself. And please keep this in mind that we expect
22 accurate --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- accurate testimony.
25 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. Well, perhaps we can talk about some of those contacts.
3 MR. TIEGER: Can we call up 65 ter 31043, please.
4 Q. These, Mr. Mandic, are the minutes of the Prijedor Municipal
5 Board from the 18th of May, 1992. And on the agenda in point 2 we see
6 report from the session of the Serbian republic Bosnia-Herzegovina
7 Assembly, and that report was given by Simo Miskovic, as we see in item
8 2, noting that:
9 "There were 18 items on the agenda, the main guide-lines in
10 future activities were identified, the commander of the Army Supreme
11 Staff appointed, members of the Presidency of the Republic elected,
12 et cetera."
13 Now, that would be a reference to the 16th Assembly Session of
14 the Assembly of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina held in
15 Banja Luka on the 12th of May, 1992; correct?
16 A. Sorry, is that written here?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger referred to the date of the Assembly
18 session which is discussed at this meeting, the 18th of May.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I just don't know the date. I
20 can't see the date. Maybe it was then, I don't know.
21 MR. TIEGER:
22 Q. That's fine, Mr. Mandic, the date is not that significant for
23 this purpose. All right. Now, the reference that we saw before, that
24 is, Miskovic briefing the members of this meeting, including yourself,
25 about the main guide-lines in future activities, that was a reference to
1 the strategic objectives of the Bosnian Serbs or the Serbian people in
2 Bosnia and Herzegovina which were articulated by Dr. Karadzic at that
3 Assembly session in Banja Luka; correct?
4 A. Yes, yes.
5 MR. TIEGER: Your Honours, I tender this document.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, document with number 31043 receives
8 number P6953.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
10 MR. TIEGER:
11 Q. And after that assembly session and after the meeting that we
12 just looked at, Prijedor authorities were implementing [Realtime
13 transcript read in error "admitting"] the decisions of the Serbian
14 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina; correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And that would include the following document --
17 MR. TIEGER: If I could call up P3417.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before you do that, Mr. Tieger, page 37, line
19 16, did you say implementing or admitting?
20 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, Mr. --
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: After this session -- the sentence reads:
22 "After the session and after the meeting that we just looked
23 at --"
24 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. -- implementing, correct. Thank you
25 very much.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
2 You were calling?
3 MR. TIEGER: That was P3417.
4 Q. Sir, this is a decision taken at the meeting held on the 22nd of
5 May, 1992, about the mobilisation on the territory of the Prijedor
6 municipality. As we see on the second page of the English but on the
7 single page in B/C/S, it was signed by Dr. Stakic. And in the preamble
8 we see that it was pursuant to the decision of the Serbian republic of
9 Bosnia and Herzegovina about the general mobilisation of forces and
10 materiel in the republic. So this is an example of the Prijedor
11 Crisis Staff and Prijedor Serbian authorities implementing the decisions
12 of the republic-level authorities; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, Mr. Mandic, I want now to turn to portions of your statement
15 dealing with particular events in Prijedor, and specifically events
16 having to do with Hambarine and Kozarac. In your statement, as you will
17 recall, you refer to the attack on Hambarine on about the 22nd of May or
18 23rd of May, 1992. And in your statement you refer to the fact that a
19 number of Muslims left Hambarine around the time of the attack.
20 Mr. Mandic, it's correct, isn't it, that the reason Muslims from
21 Hambarine might have been inclined to leave prior to the commencement of
22 the attack is because the Crisis Staff threatened them that their safety
23 was in jeopardy if the ultimatum of the Crisis Staff to hand over the
24 alleged perpetrators of the check-point incident was not fulfilled.
25 That's correct, isn't it?
1 A. Well, partly. I mean, really what the Crisis Staff, I mean, over
2 Radio Prijedor broadcast to the public, well, yes, that's the decision.
3 But the non-Serb and Serb population moved out before the take-over and
4 that could be seen from my statement. Women, children, and the elderly
5 did not wait for the month of May to see what would happen then. They
6 left a lot earlier. Of course when there is a lack of safety people do
7 flee, and the Serb population facing the belt where Hambarine is also
8 sought shelter from the war operations. They didn't stay at home.
9 That's only natural. No one knew who would win ultimately and it's
10 logical for people to withdraw if the extremists do not hand over those
11 who killed the soldier.
12 Q. You state here that the non-Serb and Serb population moved out
13 before the take-over. That seems to be all-embracing. Of course that's
14 not true, right? You're suggesting that some people moved out, but you
15 know very well that most people remained, many of whom - many of
16 whom - ended up in detention facilities in Prijedor after the attacks
18 A. Many people moved out of Prijedor before the take-over. I lived
19 in town and I knew through Sun Tours buses left every day. At first we
20 wondered why, and then later on we realised why. I'm not saying that
21 everybody left, but a lot of people left.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, the issue apparently is: Did most of the
23 people leave or did most of the people stay? So some -- let's talk about
24 did the majority stay or did the majority of non-Serbs leave Hambarine
25 before the attack?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Stayed, the majority.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The majority stayed. Thank you.
3 MR. TIEGER:
4 Q. Mr. Mandic, you also claim at paragraph 11 that there was "strong
5 resistance to the police and army action at Hambarine." In fact,
6 Mr. Mandic, the VRS didn't suffer any casualties at all; right? And you
7 acknowledged that in your testimony in the Karadzic case.
8 A. Well, those were the reports that we received. It's not that I
9 knew -- I mean, I read in Kozarski Vjesnik that one soldier had been
10 wounded. So the report said that there was strong resistance. I wasn't
11 there but that is what was presented in public.
12 Q. So according to you the report said that there was strong
13 resistance resulting in the wounding of one soldier and the destruction
14 of the -- virtually the entire community of Hambarine?
15 A. That is what the report says.
16 Q. You also testified that the -- or you provided in your statement
17 that the purpose of the operation was to remove the check-point and bring
18 those allegedly responsible for the check-point incident to justice,
19 that's the last line of paragraph 10 of your statement. In fact, the
20 army's --
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. -- the army's response to this check-point incident was to shell
23 the entire village; correct?
24 A. Well, I think that that is natural in war operations. If
25 somebody fires at the army, what else can --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, the question was not whether it's natural
2 or whether it's justified. The question simply was whether the army's
3 response to this check-point incident was to shell the entire village,
4 and I take it from your answer that you say yes that's what happened, is
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: That was the question.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. TIEGER:
10 Q. And then shortly thereafter, Mr. Mandic, the same thing happened
11 to Kozarac, right? There was a two- or three-day shelling, intensive
12 shelling of Kozarac?
13 A. That's the way it was.
14 Q. And again in your statement you referred to -- and in connection
15 with that you were also aware, were you not, that hundreds of people,
16 that is Muslims, were killed in these operations?
17 A. No, I did not know. I did not take part in these operations. I
18 wasn't counting how many people were there, who was there. If there's a
19 report that this was submitted to the Crisis Staff, then it is logical
20 that I should accept that I was made aware of that. Now, how many, I
21 mean really that was not my line of work, to deal with the number of
22 people who had been taken prisoner and ...
23 Q. Speaking of your line of work, sir, you referred in your Karadzic
24 testimony to the fact that you did not follow what the army and the
25 police were doing. That was their own line of work. So I take it
1 that -- first of all, you recall that testimony; right?
2 A. [No interpretation]
3 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We cannot hear the
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat your answer. The
6 interpreters could not hear you.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think so, yes, because through
8 the Crisis Staff I was made aware of all of these things.
9 MR. TIEGER:
10 Q. Okay. But they had their own chains of command and you were not
11 privy to their individual communications, right, internally?
12 A. Yes, I didn't communicate also. When Prijedor was taken over
13 during the first days -- can I say this? Mr. Miskovic -- no, sorry,
14 Drljaca refused co-operation. He got up and left the session because I
15 asked him where the golden money were going, the golden money they took
16 away from the people. Quite simply, I wanted to know and I didn't want
17 us to have a bad reputation that we were looting, that we were robbing
18 people; however, he didn't like that. He got up and left the session.
19 Q. So in light of what you've just explained about your line of work
20 and the chain -- unitary chains of command of the army and the police,
21 when you say in paragraph 33 of your statement:
22 "The army and the police did not have permission or orders to
23 contravene international laws of war or the Geneva Conventions."
24 You're not in a position to know if that's true or not, are you,
25 according to you?
1 A. I was not checking of them exactly. Everybody knew about the
2 Geneva Convention and ...
3 Q. Witness, I want to turn next to some of your evidence about the
4 camps. First of all, the Municipal Assembly and the offices where you
5 and other Prijedor political officials functioned were located in and
6 around the centre of town; right?
7 A. Yes, yes.
8 Q. And that would be a relatively short distance, maybe a kilometre
9 or so from Keraterm; correct?
10 A. Well, sort of, 2 kilometres.
11 Q. In paragraph 17 of your statement, you assert that the Trnopolje
12 camp was established for the civilian population which did not want to
13 participate in the conflict with the Serbs. Now, first of all, by that
14 you meant the Muslim and Croat by "civilian population"; right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. These camps, Trnopolje, Keraterm, and Omarska, were established
17 at the end of May; correct? That is, May 1992.
18 A. Yes, yes.
19 Q. And shortly after that, by the beginning of June, 1992, as many
20 as 7.000 or more Muslims and Croats were detained in those three
21 facilities; correct?
22 A. Maybe I cannot remember the exact figure, I mean how many.
23 Believe me, I don't know the number.
24 Q. You were aware that there were thousands, however; right?
25 A. Yes, thousands. Not 1-, 2-, but maybe 3-, 4-, 5- as you say.
1 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, if we --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. TIEGER: Yeah, we can break now. I anticipate concluding
4 well before the estimate.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you give me -- we'll take a break in a
7 Do I understand that you agree that people were detained at
8 Trnopolje camp and Keraterm and Omarska?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First I have to provide an
10 explanation. Omarska --
11 JUDGE ORIE: No, could --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- one cannot equate Omarska,
13 Trnopolje, and Keraterm. These are different things --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Were people detained in Trnopolje?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
16 JUDGE ORIE: No.
17 That -- because you're -- a minute ago you said that people were
18 detained there, including Trnopolje. We'll take a break first. We'd
19 like to see you back in 20 minutes. We resume at ten minutes past
21 [The witness stands down]
22 --- Recess taken at 11.49 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 12.12 p.m.
24 [The witness takes the stand]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, before we'll continue, one short question.
1 Have you ever visited Trnopolje?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You mean during the war operations?
3 At the time of war operations I never went there. I went there either in
4 the end of August or early September together with the president of the
5 municipality. We went around the schoolhouse.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So you have no personal knowledge about what
7 happened there before you went there?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. I mean, I have some
9 knowledge from what people were saying, but I was never in Omarska or
10 Keraterm or Trnopolje myself.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, please proceed.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: When you say "September," September of which year
13 were you there at Trnopolje?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1992.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, please proceed.
17 MR. TIEGER: Can we turn to P3891, please.
18 Q. This is a summary of conclusions adopted by the Prijedor
19 municipality Executive Committee relating to police matters between
20 April 29th and 17th August 1992.
21 MR. TIEGER: And if we turn to the third page in both languages,
23 Q. The third item from the bottom provides, refers to:
24 "Conclusion number 01-023-45/92 of 2 July 1992, forbidding the
25 individual release of persons from Trnopolje, Omarska, and Keraterm."
1 It's clear from this conclusion, Mr. Mandic, that people in
2 Trnopolje were detained there, isn't it?
3 A. As far as I remember I think the reasons were mainly
4 preventative. Those people left the compound during the day and returned
5 for the night. It was possible that some mines were left over on the
6 ground, that there would be drunken soldiers going around. It was for
7 their own protection. I believe this conclusion was made for that
9 Q. So people in Trnopolje, Omarska, and Keraterm, according to you,
10 were detained but detained for their own good; is that correct?
11 A. That's how it was in Trnopolje. In the other two camps they were
12 investigation centres. A triage was done after the attack on Prijedor
13 and Kozarac. There were people carrying weapons. And this part of the
14 work was handled by the police, I believe there are records of these
15 interviews. When I'm talking about safety reasons, protecting the
16 population, I'm talking about Trnopolje. As for Omarska and Keraterm, I
17 think there was no freedom of movement, apart from the transport of those
18 from Keraterm who were not carrying weapons.
19 Q. Well, with respect to Keraterm and Omarska, that's a reflection
20 of what you said in paragraph 47 of your statement in which you claimed
21 that the interviewing and investigation of persons who took part in
22 combat and who had illegal weapons and military equipment was organised
23 in Omarska. Now, first of all, before I continue on that, the organs
24 that were interrogating people there were the military and police organs;
1 A. There were inspectors, but exactly of what profile, from which
2 branch, I don't know. I know that there were some inspectors from the
3 active-duty complement and the reserve complement, but whether they were
4 only from the police or only from the army or combined, I don't know.
5 Q. Mr. Mandic, the truth is is that Omarska and Keraterm were full
6 of non-Serbs who had nothing to do with combat or weapons; isn't that
8 A. What can I accept or not if that's how it was? I don't know who
9 was held there.
10 Q. You have told this Court in your statement that people who
11 participated in combat and had weapons were held in Omarska and
12 interrogated. So your position is now that you don't know that and it
13 could very well be the case that the people held in Omarska and Keraterm
14 were civilians who had nothing to do with combat or weaponry; right?
15 A. Possibly. I even heard that some Serbs were there, not only
16 non-Serbs. There were Serbs also in Omarska. How they got to be
17 there --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, it happened now several times that you're
19 telling us that what is found in your statement that you just don't know,
20 and that's not what we expect from a witness. We expect a witness to
21 tell us what he knows for certain. You say you don't know who was
22 detained in Omarska, whereas in your statement you give a totally
23 different impression.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I had no insight myself, but
25 I would hear things --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness --
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- you know, I never got to see any
3 lists or physically see these people --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, did you tell the Defence that you may have
5 heard something about this, whereas then I would expect the statement to
6 be: I heard that this and this was the case in Omarska, instead of:
7 This happened in Omarska, because you don't know?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did hear.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, I'm telling you this because if you want
10 this Chamber to take your evidence seriously, then please be accurate and
11 do not tell us all kind of things you later say you don't know, because
12 that may affect the credibility of your testimony, and I'm telling you
13 this because you have been called by the Defence in order to function
14 here as a witness. You could spoil it, you could spoil your own evidence
15 if you're not accurate and precise.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Q. Well, Mr. Mandic, let's talk about something that I believe you
19 will and should know, and that's the following. Were you aware that
20 massive crimes had been committed against the Muslims in the Prijedor
21 region and particularly against the people who were held in those camps?
22 A. I don't know exactly how to answer. I heard there was torture
23 against non-Serbs in Omarska and in Trnopolje as well, there were
24 killings, but I didn't see any of it myself.
25 Q. Let me ask you about a very specific -- go ahead, sir.
1 A. I don't know if this is satisfactory as an answer to you. I
2 don't know how else to express myself.
3 Q. Well, let me ask you about a specific period and about some
4 specific crimes.
5 MR. TIEGER: And if I could begin by calling up 65 ter 11302,
6 please. And if we could turn to page 5 of this document in both
8 Q. Now, the overall document is an UNPROFOR document reflecting
9 information sent to members of the European community, and a portion of
10 it is a letter from Mr. Izetbegovic on July 26th, 1992, which reflects
11 the following at the top of page 5:
12 "In the meantime," and it -- and the "meantime" as shown by the
13 earlier portion of the letter refers to since the London talks.
14 "In the meantime, new mass crimes have been committed against the
15 civilian population, particularly in the Prijedor region."
16 And goes on to say:
17 "And now concentration camps have been set up in various parts of
18 Bosnia and Herzegovina."
19 Now, do you have a -- first of all, just to set the timing of
20 this, do you recall, sir, on your own - and I could show you a document
21 if you don't - that the London talks ceased for a period on about July
22 17th and then were anticipated to resume later in the month?
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe if you told him the year too.
24 MR. TIEGER: It's all 1992. Thank you.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember.
1 MR. TIEGER: Well, let me just quickly to set this call
2 65 ter 10729. I need to inform Mr. Lukic that this is a document that
3 I -- one document I think that didn't make it to our notification list,
4 and I apologise for that, but it's being used for a very limited
5 contextual purpose.
6 Q. What I'm showing you, sir, and I'll have to read it to you in
7 English, is an article by Craig Whitney to the New York Times, and the
8 reason I bring it to your attention is the date line is London, July 17,
9 1992. It refers --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, is there any dispute about this part or
11 is it important that the witness remembers himself?
12 MR. TIEGER: No, no. Not at all.
13 JUDGE ORIE: If there's any dispute, Mr. Lukic, about London
14 talks stopped 17th July and to be resumed later that month?
15 MR. LUKIC: I don't know if that's the intention of my learned
16 friend to ask me or the witness.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I was asking you --
18 MR. LUKIC: Of course not.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- whether there's any dispute about it.
20 MR. LUKIC: Of course not.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
22 MR. TIEGER:
23 Q. So I wanted to focus on that period of time, so
24 specifically - and that is, I'd ask you about massive crimes against
25 non-Serbs particularly in those facilities - now I was focusing on the
1 period between roughly July 20th and July 26th or July 17th and July
2 26th. So let me ask you: Were you aware of the massacre in Room 3 at
3 Keraterm on the night of 24th through 25th of July, 1992, about which
4 this Court has received evidence?
5 A. That was a killing that took place one night, a killing of
6 several residents. I believe I remember. I think it was Zigic who did
8 Q. It's a massacre of in excess of 100 people.
9 A. Yes, massacre. I agree, it was a massacre.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Now your reference to Zigic, is this what you heard
11 or did he kill them --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Heard, I heard about it. I didn't
13 have any experience myself.
14 JUDGE ORIE: You have no personal knowledge and you heard that
15 Zigic killed during the night 100 persons just on his own, is that what
16 you heard?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whether he was alone or several
18 people were involved, I can't remember the details now. I know that this
19 happened and I believe it was Zigic, but I don't know if anybody was with
20 him. I believe this case was tried and the court was aware of all the
21 details. I can't remember now.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And you were aware that that happened to persons
23 detained in Keraterm camp?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. Were you aware of the cleansing operations that took place in the
3 Brdo, Biscani, Ljubija, and Brezevo areas during that same period of
4 time; that is, in the latter part of July 1992? During which the army
5 and the police swept through those areas, rounding up many, many, many
6 people and during which hundreds of non-Serbs were killed.
7 A. I know that there was mopping-up, looking for the remaining
8 extremists. One of them even came to see me at my home, his name was
9 Zec. A local police officer brought him to me. We knew each other from
10 school --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Witness --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- and I said: I'm sorry, I --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, please respond to what Mr. Tieger said
14 rather than to take out one example of one person. Mr. Tieger was
15 talking about the army and the police sweeping through those areas,
16 rounding up many, during which hundreds of non-Serbs were killed. Are
17 you aware of that?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I heard that there was mopping up
19 done by the police and the army, but I told you the reason why it was
21 JUDGE ORIE: And did you also hear that large numbers of
22 non-Serbs were killed during those operations?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
25 MR. TIEGER:
1 Q. Sir, you must have known from at least your conversation with
2 this man, Mr. Zec, that these operations were brutal and bloody and that
3 the non-Serbs of Prijedor were suffering grievously from those
4 operations; correct?
5 A. No, I didn't talk to him about these operations. You understand?
6 I said: How come you are here? He said: I waited out the mopping-up
7 operation. Could you just help me get to the station. And that man now
8 lives in Vienna. We didn't really happen to talk about what was going on
9 on the ground. I didn't discuss those details with him.
10 Q. And you claim not to be aware that these areas were cleansed of
11 their inhabitants, of their non-Serb population during that time? This
12 is right in your municipality.
13 A. I knew that it was cleansed, mopped up. I don't know if people
14 were killed and how many. I couldn't know what was happening on the
15 ground, in the field.
16 Q. But UNPROFOR in Belgrade informed by Mr. Izetbegovic in Sarajevo
17 knew about the devastation to non-Serbs in Prijedor?
18 A. Well, they must have been in the field or got information from
19 those who were in the field. I didn't go there. I don't know. You
20 know, we didn't all meet with UNPROFOR and the head people. The
21 president met with them and we were busy doing different work.
22 Q. All right.
23 MR. TIEGER: I tender 11302, Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 11302 receives number P6954.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
2 MR. TIEGER:
3 Q. Mr. Mandic, in paragraph 35 of your statement you assert that the
4 law enforcement organs in the Prijedor municipality conducted
5 investigations against both known and unknown perpetrators and filed
6 misdemeanour and criminal reports against them all. In fact, Mr. Mandic,
7 you don't know if the police or the courts prosecuted the perpetrators of
8 any crimes against non-Serbs during the war; correct? And that was
9 something you admitted in the Karadzic case.
10 A. Yes, yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Now, Mr. Mandic, if you admitted that in the
12 Karadzic case - the Chamber has not looked at it - why does it then still
13 appear in your statement which was given after the Karadzic case?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's just left over from the
15 earlier statement. The statement was not revised, that's why these
16 things happen.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could you then tell us what happened during the
18 taking of that statement. You say it was not revised. I take it that
19 you were interviewed and that the statement was made and that you told
20 the interviewers what you knew and that you would leave out what had
21 turned out not to be reliable during your Karadzic testimony. Or did
22 that not happen?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Some passages remained that
24 simply -- they were not harmonised with the evidence given in the
25 Karadzic case, the President Karadzic case.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Do we have to understand that part of your statement
2 is just a left over of an interview that took place before your Karadzic
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Something like that.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And you nevertheless attested at the beginning of
6 your testimony that it was all accurate and truthful.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not a lawyer and simply such
8 things -- I don't know how to explain.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, well, let me tell you clearly that we are at a
10 point where I have to warn you if you say: I didn't think about my
11 attestation, whether what is found in my statement is truthful or not,
12 then perhaps you should consider to withdraw that because let's not
13 forget that if you say it's truthful and if it now turns out that it's
14 just a left over which you, not being a lawyer, stayed although you had
15 been examined on the matter in Karadzic, that comes close to giving false
16 testimony. Are you aware of that?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now I'm aware of that, but it was
18 not my intention to lie. I have no reason to lie, to perjure myself. I
19 wouldn't have come here for that.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I have warned you now four or five times only today.
21 Is that clear to you? If you say: My attestation is not reliable, then
22 please tell us at this moment. And if you say: I want to think about
23 it, then you'll be given an opportunity.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could I please think about it or
25 could I perhaps consult lawyers? I really don't understand, believe me.
1 JUDGE ORIE: No, you're not allowed to consult a lawyer at this
2 moment, at least not the lawyers of Mr. Mladic. If you say that the
3 attestation you gave earlier today may not be reliable, then please tell
4 us; and if you say: I want to think about it, then you'll have an
5 opportunity to do that during the next break. At the same time, I have
6 to warn you, if you're not telling us the truth, the whole truth, and
7 nothing but the truth, that you expose yourself to being prosecuted for
8 false testimony and that you are at risk to be punished with a term of
9 imprisonment of seven years. I have to warn you.
10 Listen carefully to the next question of Mr. Tieger. You have an
11 opportunity to think about your own statement during the break. And
12 please be aware that every single word you're telling us should be the
13 truth, not only the truth, but the whole truth and nothing but truth.
14 Mr. Tieger.
15 MR. TIEGER: I just have one more matter, Mr. President.
16 Q. Mr. Mandic, you provided evidence in your statement about the
17 fighting in Prijedor town on the 30th of May, 1992, following the attack
18 on Prijedor town and its resolution, that is, the fact that it was dealt
19 with relatively quickly by the Serbian police and military authorities.
20 The neighbourhood known as Stari Grad was essentially destroyed by the
21 VRS; right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And in fact after that happened, the Crisis Staff issued a number
24 of decisions completing the demolition of Stari Grad; right?
25 A. I don't understand, which decisions?
1 Q. To demolish the structure -- to finally completely level the
2 structures that had been demolished or destroyed by the VRS attack.
3 A. That has to do with the lists of property, the inventory. Could
4 you please explain that to me. A commission was set up to make a list of
5 property that had been demolished during the war operations. Is that
7 Q. No, no, I was simply talking about the physical -- the demolition
8 of the remaining ruins but it's not important. My main focus was on the
9 aftermath of the attack itself.
10 MR. TIEGER: And that in fact was my last subject, Mr. President,
11 and concludes the examination.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Tieger.
13 I think it would be best to take the break a bit earlier than we
14 would usually do so as to give the witness an opportunity to think about
15 his statement.
16 Witness, we'll take an early break. I advised you to think about
17 whether your attestation given at the beginning of your testimony was a
18 valid attestation. If you have any doubt, please tell us after the
19 break. You may now follow the usher and we would like to see you back in
20 20 minutes.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 [The witness stands down]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Before we take the break, Mr. Lukic, have you read
24 the testimony of this witness in the Karadzic case?
25 MR. LUKIC: I did, Your Honour, only when this witness came here
1 to The Hague.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, nevertheless you present as evidence his
3 statement without any further question -- questions in which - and I just
4 limit myself to the line raised by Mr. Tieger - paragraph 35:
5 "The law enforcement organs, the prosecutor's office of Prijedor
6 municipality conducted investigations against both known and unknown
7 perpetrators and filed misdemeanour and criminal reports against them
9 We do understand that the witness did not deny what was put to
10 him by Mr. Tieger, and again we haven't read that so we have no opinion
11 about that, but at least the witness did not deny that he had withdrawn
12 from that in his Karadzic testimony. Is --
13 MR. LUKIC: What he explained is that he has general knowledge,
14 that he has some, that's more hearsay.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then --
16 MR. LUKIC: He never claimed that he conducted investigations --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So--
18 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] --
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- then the questions that you should have put to
20 this witness if you would not have even withdrawn his statement, you
21 should have asked the witness: The last line of paragraph 35, is that
22 your personal knowledge or is it what you heard or et cetera? I mean, it
23 comes -- much of what the witness is supposed to have said here turns out
24 to be what he may have heard or not heard, a lot of things he said facing
25 the documents he had to step back from what he said. And the witness
1 just presents those as facts, and if he doesn't know and again I would
2 like -- as a matter of fact, I'd like to see the portion in the Karadzic
3 statement where he steps back from it, whether he said: Well, I do know
4 but not all the details. Or did he say: Well, actually, it's only what
5 I heard but I have no personal knowledge? Would you agree that we look
6 at that portion which apparently Mr. Tieger had on his mind so that we
7 know what situation we are facing as a Chamber at this moment.
8 MR. LUKIC: I have no problems with that, but I think that
9 everything is line with his -- today's answers.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that doesn't make it -- of course I'm
11 discussing this because of your own responsibility, not only for the
12 witness but also for you presenting this statement without any further
13 questions, without any further comments.
14 Therefore, Mr. Tieger, is there any way we could read on our
15 screens the relevant portion of the Karadzic statement -- testimony.
16 MR. TIEGER: It's 65 ter 31659 at page 34.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Now, Mr. Lukic, if there's any other portion that
18 you consider to be relevant in this context, of course we'd look at that
19 as well. Perhaps we just read it from our screens. This Chamber can
20 read, the Judges of this Chamber.
21 Perhaps could we go back one page or is that because it seems
22 that it -- in the introduction is found in the previous page or is it --
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tieger, you could direct us to the relevant
24 portion on the page?
25 MR. TIEGER: Sure. The question was:
1 "I'm asking you about the bodies you belong to, the Crisis Staff
2 and the executive" -- I'm sorry.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you're reading --
4 MR. TIEGER: [Overlapping speakers] that side of the -- there's a
5 discussion about this aspect, and I don't want to go back any farther
6 than necessary. The alleged prosecution and so on, it's somewhat
7 detailed. But then we begin by saying:
8 "So in your statement" -- this is at the bottom of page 33.
9 "So in your statement when you said police organs in the
10 prosecutor's office of the Prijedor municipality undertook various
11 investigations and filed misdemeanours and criminal reports against
12 perpetrators, what exactly is that based on if you can only name one
13 murder incident and you don't even know if the perpetrator was
15 "A. Well, I assumed that everybody did what they were supposed
16 to do, that courts and the prosecutor's office did what they were
17 supposed to and the police did the same. One couldn't just turn a blind
18 eye on events that happened because they did happen, and I suppose that
19 they documented those things and that they caught the perpetrators.
20 There were talks about various people who had done things. I didn't go
21 to the police or to the court to ask whether they followed through or not
22 and who the perps were."
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, that sounds very much as just an
24 assumption, that everyone did what they were supposed to do rather than
25 global knowledge of what happened. It's just assumptions.
1 MR. LUKIC: If I may, Your Honour. He started that sentence,
2 only in English you have two sentences, in B/C/S it's one. He started
3 that sentence:
4 "It is common knowledge ..."
5 And then also --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then --
7 MR. LUKIC: -- in that sentence you have "the prosecution" --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then if you know that there's a difference,
9 why didn't you check that? Why does the witness say that this was just
10 left overs and that -- I mean, it's not the first time that this Chamber
11 raises issues, and we know that we blamed for being partial in this
12 respect, we've seen that before. But, Mr. Lukic, if the B/C/S says
13 something different, then we'd like to have that verified --
14 MR. LUKIC: It's --
15 JUDGE ORIE: -- during the break.
16 MR. LUKIC: It's one sentence, that's what changes, that this
17 "general knowledge" is -- actually applies to the second sentence in
18 English --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
20 MR. LUKIC: -- as well, the law, that law enforcement organs --
21 JUDGE ORIE: What I see is:
22 "It is common knowledge that individual and all manner of
23 killings took place, that is common knowledge."
24 Now, the next sentence --
25 MR. LUKIC: Which is the same sentence in B/C/S.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll need to --
2 MR. LUKIC: It was comma instead of full stop in B/C/S. But
3 probably it's easier to translate in English with breaking here. I don't
4 even blame the translators, but really in B/C/S it's one sentence.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. What we'll try to find out, whether CLSS
6 during the break would be in a position to explain to the Chamber whether
7 the phrase in paragraph 35 starting with "it is common knowledge,"
8 whether linguistically the "common knowledge" would also extend to what
9 follows after "the law enforcement organs, the prosecutor's office of
10 Prijedor conducted investigations against both known and unknown
11 perpetrators and filed misdemeanour and criminal reports against them
12 all." Because the English translation does not suggest that the common
13 law -- the common knowledge phrase extends to that part. If that is
14 debatable, if that's not perhaps what after verification turns out to be
15 the case, then the Chamber would like to know that.
16 Madam Registrar, I know that we are asking the impossible from
17 CLSS and we have done that already so many times, but if this portion of
18 the transcript, together with paragraph 35 of the witness's statement
19 could be given to CLSS and if we -- if only we could have a provisional
20 opinion about the question we have put, then the Chamber would appreciate
21 to know that before we resume and we intend to resume at quarter past
22 1.00 and we'll take a break until then.
23 --- Recess taken at 12.57 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 1.25 p.m.
25 [The witness takes the stand]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Welcome back, Mr. Mandic. I asked you to think
2 about the attestation you've given --
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: -- at the beginning of your testimony, and I'll go
5 through the questions again that were put by Mr. Lukic. After you had
6 made a correction to your statement, you changed the date from 30th of
7 May to 30th of April, Mr. Lukic asked you whether the statement, after
8 this correction, whether the facts stated in this statement, whether they
9 are accurate as you told them to the Defence team of General Mladic.
10 Could you -- you then answered "yes." Is your answer still "yes," that
11 this is what you told the Defence team?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the next question was whether the content
14 of the statement was accurate and truthful.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My answer was yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And it still is?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And now we've established that a
18 part is not adequate in relation to the time-period when communications
19 were down between Prijedor and the Krajina, or rather, and Pale. That
20 was established -- actually, maybe it was an oversight on my part during
21 the defence of Mr. Karadzic. This was a shorter period of time, not
22 several months.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, there have been other instances such as
24 whether the take-over was triggered by the telegram or whether there have
25 been other events which happened and before and that preparations were
1 made already, that in that respect I think you also corrected your
2 statement, isn't it?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I added that because that is
4 how I understood the question, what initiated the take-over. And then as
5 the questions went on then we got to what was happening before that
6 telegram on the 29th of April.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There are other matters as well where you
8 apparently seem to have no personal knowledge where you claimed facts to
9 be as you described them, although not knowing personally about them.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that I heard that not that I
11 saw it. Do you understand that? I live in that town, I ...
12 JUDGE ORIE: You often said things happened where, as we
13 understand now, you wanted to say "I heard that it happened," which is
14 not the same.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, yes, exactly. I mean, I
16 tend to equate that and then it's my jargon and --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I then have to understand that whatever you
18 present as facts, that we should seriously consider that they may not be
19 facts but that it's just what you heard were the facts?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, no. I mean, I think it's not
21 really that much. I mean, we documented things and confirmed things,
22 things that happened.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then the last question that was put to you was
24 whether you'd -- if the same questions would be put to you today, whether
25 you'd answer the same. And I took it and from your answer I also took it
1 that you understood it to be that in substance it would be the same
2 answers to those questions.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And that still stands, as far as you're concerned?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but maybe my formulation is
6 not as expected from me, I mean simply I'm not very skilful at this kind
7 of thing.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have, before I give an opportunity to
9 Mr. Lukic to re-examine you, I have one other question. You were asked
10 quite some questions by Mr. Tieger about massacres, people being killed,
11 et cetera. Now, some of these events you stated that you had heard about
12 it and so to that extent you knew about them, but they do not appear in
13 your statement. Do you have an explanation as to why you give quite some
14 details about all kind of things which now turn out to be hearsay rather
15 than personal knowledge, whereas you didn't say anything about hearsay on
16 such killings and massacres. Do you have an explanation as why you
17 presented in hearsay what we find in your statement and that you did not
18 present as hearsay what Mr. Tieger asked you?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, quite simply, knowing that
20 such and such a thing happened, that I heard about it, that's what shows
21 that that kind of thing did happen, I mean I didn't state -- I don't know
22 whether it's necessary to state that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You would say that the killings were known anyhow,
24 you don't have to state that? Or I do not fully understand perhaps what
25 you are --
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, yes, along those lines, yes,
2 in that sense, yes, that it's generally known and that quite simply I
3 assume that the Prosecution and the Court know that and I don't have to
4 describe it additionally, and then there's also the public security
5 station, the court, the prosecutor's office in Prijedor -- I mean, if
6 they all did their job I assume that everybody should do their job, at
7 least that's the way I've been taught.
8 JUDGE ORIE: So you said all the nasty things that may have
9 happened, you didn't include those in your statement, nasty things
10 against non-Serbs, you didn't include them in your statement because they
11 were commonly known and therefore there was no need to address them; is
12 that what you're telling us?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know what to say to you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Just answer the question, whether that's how we have
15 to understand your testimony.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it's commonly known that it
17 happened and I gave that statement, I said that this kind of thing
18 happened and everything that happened is also there at the public
19 security station.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now you say this is what you stated, but as a
21 matter of fact you did not state that it was common knowledge that
22 non-Serbs were killed in Keraterm or that during operations, cleansing
23 operations, a large number of non-Serbs were killed. You expressed
24 yourself mainly on Serbs being attacked and Serbs being killed and not on
25 non-Serbs being attacked and non-Serbs being killed, and I'm asking you
1 what explains that. You spent quite a few words on killings and attacks
2 against Serbs and that you apparently did not spend words on killings and
3 massacres of non-Serbs. And I'm asking you whether what explains that
4 you focused on one and did not say anything about the other?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I cannot explain. I
6 don't know.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You have no explanation for that. Then --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you allow me. Maybe, I thought
9 at that moment that the Tribunal had information about what happened to
10 non-Serbs but that it did not have information about what happened to
11 Serbs. Perhaps that was my thinking. I mean, now that I'm so worked up
12 I cannot really say.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you there. Who gave you that
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, perhaps my very own personal
16 impression. It's not that somebody else gave me this impression.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I leave it to that.
18 Mr. Lukic, I will read what seems to be the provisional view of
19 CLSS. It reads:
20 "The B/C/S version consists of two co-ordinated sentences.
21 'Common knowledge' does not extend to the second part of the sentence.
22 The English translation could also read:
23 "'It is common knowledge that'" and then what follows and "'the
24 law enforcement organs' ... et cetera."
25 This is the provisional information we received from CLSS and of
1 course it was done very quickly. Mr. Lukic, if you have any questions in
2 re-examination, you may put them to the witness now.
3 MR. LUKIC: If I can comment on this translation, I have to say
4 that with full respect I do not agree.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. You do not agree. That's fine. Then we can
6 argue that later on, but that is, and I said, provisional opinion given
7 by CLSS and whether there's any room for further argument on the matter
8 we'll learn that and you can make submissions at a later stage on that
9 but we're not going to do that now. Please proceed.
10 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Before I continue questioning this witness, I would just express
12 our position regarding hearsay evidence in this court.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Not in the presence of the witness. You may do
14 so -- we'll give you an opportunity to do that, but we would first like
15 to see whether we can conclude the testimony of this witness. And if you
16 say you need a lot of time, please be aware that the Chamber is not
17 convinced that part of the problems are not due to the way in which you
18 had taken the statement and how it was presented. So therefore, use your
19 time as efficiently as possible.
20 MR. LUKIC: If we can see P6948 now, we'll start with that one.
21 Re-examination by Mr. Lukic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Mandic, first of all, good afternoon again.
23 A. Good afternoon.
24 Q. In this first paragraph as well as paragraph 3, number 1, namely
25 that in leading positions, in management positions, what positions were
1 meant exactly, do you know?
2 A. This is a very broad concept. I think it means public security,
3 the army, and some other agencies and authorities where reliable people
4 were needed, people loyal to the authorities.
5 Q. Thank you. Was the intention to include butchers, tradesmen?
6 A. No, only people who made important decisions.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: How do you understand, Mr. Witness, the phrase
8 that says: "All posts of importance for the functioning of economic
9 entities," what would that include?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That would be the electrical
11 distribution company, that means power transmission, also telecom,
12 telephone providers, some means of communication such as railways.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are we to understand you to be saying that
14 butchers and tradesmen are not part of economic entities?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, may I remind you that the focus was on
18 whether the test was ethnicity or anything else and that's -- that's the
19 most important element rather than to spend a lot of time on defining on
20 whether position A would just fall within or just fall outside the scope
21 of what is mentioned here. The document is clear in this respect, that
22 it is not any post, not just everything, it should have a certain
23 importance. But the focus, if I understand the questions of Mr. Tieger
24 well, is about whether ethnicity was, at least in the beginning of
25 paragraph 1 the item, and that loyalty would be an item for those who
1 were of Serb ethnicity. That is the issue which is central to the
2 questions put by Mr. Tieger.
3 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, that's why I directed the attention of
4 this witness to paragraph 3 of the same. So where it says:
5 "Likewise, these posts may not be held by these employees of
6 Serbian ethnicity who have not confirmed in the plebiscite or have not
7 yet accepted that the only representative of the Serbian people is a
8 Serbian Democratic Party."
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, now, it's -- I mean --
10 MR. LUKIC: I just want to clarify which positions this
11 addresses, so no Muslims, no Croats, no Serbs according to this document
12 on these positions --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well --
14 MR. LUKIC: -- or Serbs who are not loyal.
15 JUDGE ORIE: If the witness has any factual knowledge about it
16 and otherwise the interpretation of this document is for the parties and
17 for the Bench to further consider. And it's perfectly clear that the
18 decision excludes in general terms non-Serbs and further excludes Serbs
19 to the extent they are not loyal. That seems prima facie what the
20 document tells. Please proceed.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Mr. Mandic, did parties nominate their candidates for these
24 A. I don't understand what you mean, what parties? The SDS was the
25 only party.
1 Q. Before the take-over.
2 A. Yes, there was a division of power and each party nominated its
3 members for different positions.
4 Q. At the time when this decision was made, power had been taken
5 over and SDS was in power; correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. In July 1992 -- [In English] That was part of my previous
8 question, so I got an answer "yes." I will move now to the next topic
9 regarding Crisis Staffs.
10 [Interpretation] My learned friend Mr. Tieger put it to you
11 earlier today that the Crisis Staff existed before the take-over. First
12 I'd like to ask you: To the best of your knowledge was there one
13 Crisis Staff in Prijedor or several?
14 A. In which period? Because we've now established --
15 Q. Let's say in the entire year of 1992, was one Crisis Staff
16 organised in Prijedor or more than one?
17 A. According to some information I have, at the public security
18 station there was a separate Crisis Staff, apart from the Crisis Staff of
19 the municipality of Prijedor.
20 Q. Do you know if the SDS had their own Crisis Staff?
21 A. We've just established here that some sort of Crisis Staff
22 existed, and now we see, in various sessions which I did not attend, it
23 existed physically. So obviously there was an SDS Crisis Staff. It was
24 present on the ground.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Do you know that it was present on the ground?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I meant those decisions of the
2 Municipal Board of the SDS, that's what I was alluding to, the
3 Crisis Staff. If they were calling themselves "Crisis Staff," then they
4 should have been present or it was written erroneously, not "local
5 commune" but "Crisis Staff."
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you attended meetings from what I
7 understood from your testimony in which tasks and functioning of a
8 Crisis Staff was discussed before the 30th of April?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: These are the facts you know. Do you know anything
11 more about those Crisis Staffs, who were members of it, where they met,
12 what they did? Do you know anything about it? Not what you ...
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think the chairman of the
14 Crisis Staff was Simo Miskovic from the Municipal Board of the SDS.
15 Another member was also a deputy. There may even be a list of people who
16 were members of the Crisis Staff ex officio. If we could get that
17 document shown me by the Prosecutor earlier, we could see the names.
18 JUDGE ORIE: You say: I think the chairman of the Crisis Staff
19 was Simo Miskovic. Why do you think that?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, that's how I express myself.
21 I think.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but what do you know? Did he tell you? Is it
23 on the basis of the meetings that you learned that he was?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, based on the meetings.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
1 Please proceed -- Mr. Lukic, I only want facts and the Chamber
2 wants facts.
3 MR. LUKIC: We'll see the facts.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Not thoughts, not opinions. Facts. So the witness
5 heard during the meetings that Simo Miskovic was the chairman of the
6 Crisis Staff. Please proceed.
7 MR. LUKIC: Can we see P3733, please. I apologise, it's P3773.
8 That's a document we received later, so I would just kindly ask to see
9 the bottom of the page. We need the next page in English.
10 Q. [Interpretation] Under number 2 you see at the bottom of the page
11 in B/C/S it says:
12 "Commander of the Crisis Staff shall be the president of the
13 Municipal Board of the SDS of Prijedor."
14 This document was shown to you earlier by the Prosecution. You
15 told us today that you'd heard this before, but did you see this document
16 before today, before the Prosecution showed it to you?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Thank you. Who was the president of the Municipal Board of the
19 SDS of Prijedor?
20 A. Simo Miskovic.
21 Q. Thank you. Now we've cleared that up, let us clear up when the
22 Crisis Staff of which you were a member was established. Let me show you
23 a document that we tendered as an associated exhibit.
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] P4086.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Can I ask whether there's any dispute about a
1 Crisis Staff in which the witness was appointed being established at a
2 later point in time?
3 Mr. Tieger.
4 MR. TIEGER: Well, I'm at something of a disadvantage because I'm
5 not conversant with the testimony of all witnesses who preceded this
6 witness. I presume we may be discussing the distinction between a
7 Crisis Staff that pre-existed the conflict and Crisis Staff that existed
8 in the aftermath of the Djeric instructions which this Court received,
9 but I'm not sure about the nuances in which that distinction has been
10 presented so I would be a little reluctant to --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So there may be some dispute about that.
12 Mr. Lukic, the focus was on how reliable the testimony of the
13 witness was, which was talking about a Crisis Staff established after the
14 30th of April, where the witness, as he testified now, was aware of the
15 existence of a Crisis Staff, whether the same or not exactly the same,
16 prior to that. And I think that the Prosecution introduced that evidence
17 in order to -- for the Chamber to assess the reliability and the
18 credibility of this witness.
19 MR. LUKIC: Exactly, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger seems to -- seems to confirm that.
21 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, in paragraph 6 of his statement this
22 gentleman is explicitly addressing a particular Crisis Staff.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and he --
24 MR. LUKIC: And he says --
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- doesn't say anything about the other Crisis Staff
1 that he was apparently aware of that existed.
2 MR. LUKIC: My colleague Tieger tried to say that this paragraph
3 6 is not truthful and I'm telling you it is.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I think as a matter of fact that it has been
5 established now that it's at least not the whole of the truth. Let's
6 leave it to that for the time being.
7 MR. LUKIC: No, no, this paragraph is exactly truthful.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
9 MR. LUKIC: And I'll tell you why.
10 JUDGE ORIE: The whole truth.
11 MR. LUKIC: It says:
12 "The Council for National Defence" [overlapping speakers] --
13 JUDGE ORIE: One second, one second.
14 MR. LUKIC: "The Council for National Defence..." --
15 JUDGE ORIE: One second, one second.
16 MR. LUKIC: -- "... decided" --
17 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
18 Mr. Lukic, you may ask questions and then elicit the matter you
19 want to further --
20 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- clarify.
22 Q. [Interpretation] So, Mr. Mandic, in 6 you say:
23 "After the peaceful take-over of power in Prijedor on the 30th of
24 April, 1992, the Council for National Defence adopted a decision to set
25 up a Crisis Staff in order to more easily overcome the newly arisen
1 complex political and security situation in the municipality of
3 The Council for National Defence --
4 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let us look at the period before,
5 P2871, please.
6 Q. Mr. Mandic, we are looking at the record from the 4th Session of
7 the Council for National Defence of the Prijedor municipality dated
8 15 May, 1992. Under agenda item 1, it says:
9 "Decision on the organisation and functioning of the
10 Crisis Staff."
11 Down below under conclusions number 1 on the same page, it says:
12 "The draft decision on the organisation and functioning of the
13 Crisis Staff is hereby accepted with the proviso that a representative of
14 the garrison in Prijedor be added to the proposed list of members of the
15 Crisis Staff."
16 Before this date and before this draft, did there exist a
17 Crisis Staff of which you were a member?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Thank you. Let us look at P4086. It's another document tendered
20 by the Prosecution today as associated to your testimony. We read here:
21 "Pursuant to Article 110 of the Constitution of the
22 Serbian Republic in Article 4 of the decision of the organisation and
23 work of Prijedor municipal Crisis Staff, the Municipal Assembly of
24 Prijedor at its session held on 20th May 1992 adopted the following
25 decision on appointments to the Prijedor municipal Crisis Staff ..."
1 Were you a member of that Crisis Staff?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Now it says for the president, vice-president, and members of the
4 Crisis Staff, the following people are appointed.
5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need the next page.
6 Q. We see the president and vice-president under numbers 1 and 2 and
7 who's the man under number 5?
8 A. My humble self.
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need page 2 in English.
10 Q. We see this was signed by the president of the Municipal Assembly
11 and the date is 20 May 1992. Do you have direct knowledge that the
12 Municipal Assembly of Prijedor decided to set up the Crisis Staff for the
13 municipality of Prijedor on 20th May 1992?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. We've seen in a previous document which was a record from a
16 session of the Council for National Defence dated 15 May 1992 that there
17 was a proposal for a member of the garrison to be also included in the
18 Crisis Staff.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see in e-court
20 65 ter 31674.
21 Q. As you can see, Mr. Mandic, we have before us an issue of the
22 Official Gazette of the municipality of Prijedor of 25 June 1992, and we
23 see that it promulgates the decision on the organisation and work of the
24 Prijedor municipal Crisis Staff.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We will need paragraph 4 -- Article 4
1 in fact. Next page in English.
2 Q. It says in this Article 4 of the decision published in the
3 Official Gazette that:
4 "The Crisis Staff of Prijedor municipality consists of a
5 president, a vice-president, and nine members.
6 "The president of the Municipal Assembly shall serve ex officio
7 as the president of the Crisis Staff and the vice-president of the
8 Municipal Assembly as the vice-president of the Crisis Staff."
9 And then follow the names of the members, indicating each of
10 their positions. Where do you see yourself in this list, could you
11 please read till the end.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need to move to the next page in
13 English --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, I'm again asking Mr. Tieger, this
15 Crisis Staff, the establishment of this after the take-over, is that in
16 dispute, irrespective of whether there was another Crisis Staff?
17 MR. TIEGER: No, Mr. President, it's not.
18 JUDGE ORIE: So then we don't have -- that's accepted by --
19 there's no dispute about this Crisis Staff being established.
20 Again, Mr. Lukic, the issue was whether the witness had given the
21 whole of the truth, and if you say A established a Crisis Staff, then
22 there are a few options. And I don't think Mr. Tieger in this respect in
23 view of his questions, although he expressed himself not very accurately
24 in this respect by saying this is not true, I think what Mr. Tieger
25 intended to establish is that there was at least a Crisis Staff prior to
1 that date which is relevant in this context and that by the line -- the
2 statement by the witness that this may have given an impression which
3 does not reflect the whole of the situation. I think that's the issue
4 and there's no further dispute about this Crisis Staff being established
5 under those circumstances at a later stage.
6 And we do know, and you have, I think, and there seems to be no
7 dispute about that, that that other Crisis Staff was established not
8 exactly by the secretary of National Defence but still a Crisis Staff
9 functioning in the Prijedor context. That seems to be the issue. If
10 there's any further question to be asked about that, please do.
11 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, in regard of this paragraph it's not
12 only mentioned it was double safe-guard. It says first "Council for
13 National Defence decided," and the first safe-guard is: "Following a
14 peaceful take-over of power in Prijedor on 30th of April, 1992." So --
15 JUDGE ORIE: And that's exactly where the dispute is, whether
16 this presents a truthful picture by not saying anything about the other
17 Crisis Staff and exclusively dealing with this Crisis Staff. That's
18 exactly the issue. I don't think that the witness can help us out very
19 much. I'm not --
20 MR. LUKIC: I have no problem with that if you are going to apply
21 the same standard to Prosecutor witnesses. I have no problem with that.
22 But we have to go back to every single witness of the Prosecution and see
23 what they did mention in their statements and what we elicited from their
24 cross-examination. If that's the same standard, I'm ready to sacrifice
25 this witness.
1 JUDGE ORIE: If a witness presents a picture by leaving out other
2 elements which are relevant and give a distorted picture of the events, I
3 think that this Chamber has always been very alert to establish that, and
4 certainly in cross-examination the Defence has done a good job in many
6 MR. LUKIC: With all due respect, we do not agree with your --
7 JUDGE ORIE: I do not -- I do not --
8 MR. LUKIC: -- that it's a distorted truth. It's not.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I am not seeking your agreement. Please proceed.
10 MR. LUKIC: Still we need to conclude with this document because
11 it's not in evidence and we think it's crucial because it rebuts the
12 evidence of several Prosecution witnesses.
13 JUDGE ORIE: You can tender it and then we'll hear from
14 Mr. Tieger whether there's any objection.
15 MR. LUKIC: Because in this document we can see the members --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic --
17 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- if you want to tender it?
19 MR. LUKIC: Yes, I do want to tender it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
21 Any objection?
22 MR. TIEGER: No.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, document with number 31674 receives
25 number D827.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
2 MR. LUKIC: Thank you. Still I'll need some clarification from
3 the witness since he's the only witness from the Crisis Staff for the
5 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Mandic, could you please tell us where you
6 recognise yourself in Article 4 because there is no reference to any
7 names here. I'm sorry, I've just been told that the question has not
8 been interpreted. Where do you recognise yourself in paragraph 4?
9 Because there are no names that have been referred to.
10 A. The second line of the second paragraph:
11 "The commander of the municipal staff of civilian defence ..."
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could we see the first page -- the earlier page
13 of --
14 MR. LUKIC: In English.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- or the first part of paragraph 4 in English.
16 MR. LUKIC: Yes, I apologise.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did --
18 JUDGE ORIE: It reads commander of the --
19 MR. LUKIC: Yeah, it's --
20 JUDGE ORIE: -- municipal people's defence staff. That is
21 what --
22 MR. LUKIC: Should be civilian defence, I think.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's a translation issue. But that's where
24 the witness --
25 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- finds that he was a member -- appointed member of
2 that Crisis Staff. Please proceed.
3 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Mandic, among these posts and later in the
5 work of the Crisis Staff, was there anyone from the garrison or from the
6 army there? Do you see this amongst these positions that are referred
8 A. If you are addressing me, I did not understand the question or
9 maybe I didn't hear it. I apologise.
10 Q. Among these office holders, are there any members of the Army of
11 Republika Srpska here and were any members of the Army of
12 Republika Srpska members of the Crisis Staff?
13 A. No. No one from the Army of Republika Srpska is on the list of
14 members of the Crisis Staff.
15 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I see it's --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm looking at the clock. How much time would
17 you still need?
18 MR. LUKIC: I'm trying to calculate now. Probably not more than
19 15, 20 minutes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Tomorrow you have 15 minutes. We'll -- Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER: Just very quickly, Mr. President. I think the Court
22 went a long way to clarifying the issue of the Crisis Staffs. I just
23 wanted to respond more explicitly to something the Court asked about the
24 reasons for introducing evidence related to that. You focused on
25 credibility assessment and of course that's in part true but it was also
1 obviously so that the Court would have a more full and proper evidential
2 basis to asses the breach take-over circumstances.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The existence of a Crisis Staff there and the
4 discussions on the A and B Variants. That's understood.
5 Mr. Mandic, we'll not finish today. We'd like to see you back
6 tomorrow morning. It will be a short session.
7 Mr. Tieger, could you already give an estimate as matters stand
8 now as to how much time you would need?
9 MR. TIEGER: None.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, we would like to see you back tomorrow
11 morning at 9.30 in this same courtroom, and I have to instruct you that
12 you should not speak with anyone about your testimony, whether it is
13 testimony already given or still to be given tomorrow. So no
14 communication with whomever. If that is clear to you, you may now follow
15 the usher.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is clear to me, thank you.
17 [The witness stands down]
18 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day and we'll resume tomorrow,
19 Thursday, the 27th of November, 9.30 in the morning in this same
20 courtroom, I.
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.18 p.m.,
22 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 27th day of
23 November, 2014, at 9.30 a.m.