Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 33891

 1                           Tuesday, 31 March 2015

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.

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

 6     courtroom.

 7             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case

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

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             The Chamber was informed that the OTP wants to raise a

12     preliminary matter.

13             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Mr. President.  There are actually two

14     matters, as indicated yesterday, one of which was touched on briefly but

15     I think may benefit from some additional clarification.  That was with

16     respect to MFI D920.  I mentioned yesterday that the translation wasn't

17     the issue but the question of whether or not the document had actually

18     been raised during the course of the witness's testimony.  And in that

19     respect, I would note that the document was tendered on March 2nd at

20     transcript page 32389.  At that point, Mr. Lukic referred back to the

21     previous day's session, noting that he had omitted to offer into evidence

22     two documents.  He referred to what became D919 by its exhibit number,

23     1D5364, and indeed that document was called up as under that exhibit

24     number and discussed in court the previous day.  And then he mentioned

25     another one, as he put it, D5367.  That then became MFI D920.  Our search

Page 33892

 1     through the records of the previous day did not reveal a reference to

 2     5367 or any discussion of that document and that's the issue at the

 3     moment.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic -- or if you want to further verify the

 5     transcripts, then we would like to hear from you after the break.

 6             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We leave it to that.

 8             MR. TIEGER:  And the second matter --

 9             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Tieger.

10             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I think -- I take it you referred to 1D5367.

12             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, that's correct.

13             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  The 1 was missing.

14             MR. TIEGER:  I abbreviated the reference.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, which may cause some confusion and it suddenly

16     looks like as if it's an exhibit, which it isn't.

17             MR. TIEGER:  And in fact, that's precisely what the transcript

18     says when the document is mentioned on the 2nd, as I mentioned, when it

19     was tendered.  So we looked back for the reference under that number in

20     the previous day's transcript without success.

21             The second matter is one I presume the Court is aware of but did

22     not want to simply assume, and that's with reference to the videolink

23     motion for Witness -- proposed Witness Seselj.  Yesterday the decision by

24     the Appeals Chamber was issued effectively vacating or revoking the

25     provisional release and ordering the Trial Chamber to revoke the previous

Page 33893

 1     order and order his return to the DU.  It appears to us that essentially

 2     moots the motion pending before the Court, but I leave to the Court and

 3     to Mr. Lukic the precise mechanism for how that will be handled.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic.

 5             MR. LUKIC:  I think it's not in our hands anymore.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  No -- well, whether the motion has become moot and

 7     whether you withdraw it is in your hands, but whether the circumstances

 8     will develop in such a way that you finally have reasons to withdraw

 9     it -- I mean, a decision is one and then of course the decision has to be

10     enforced.

11             MR. LUKIC:  So our position is --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  So --

13             MR. LUKIC:  -- as long as the witness is not here, we cannot

14     withdraw that -- our motion.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Tieger relies on the legal situation at

16     this moment, whereas the Defence apparently wants to rely at this moment

17     on the situation practically.  We'll think about that and of course we'll

18     then hope that the practical situation ...

19                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  We turn into private session.

21                           [Private session]

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 33894

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12                           [Open session]

13             THE REGISTRAR:  We're back in open session, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

15             The Chamber turned into private session because it wanted to

16     verify whether it had touched upon anything related to the reasons for

17     which the motion for a videolink was made confidential.  It turned out

18     that we have not touched upon any such thing, therefore the transcript

19     can remain as it is.

20             Mr. Tieger.

21             MR. TIEGER:  Yeah, thank you, Mr. President.  Let me just offer

22     one additional observation, and that is the presumed dichotomy between

23     the legal situation and the factual situation I think is not as clear as

24     Mr. Lukic might have suggested.  I think the -- that recent developments

25     also impact on --

Page 33895

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             MR. TIEGER:  -- the basis for the motion, any --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 4             MR. TIEGER:  -- possibility of enforcing any order, et cetera.

 5     So all those factors are also at play.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's the reason why we take our time to

 7     think about it and nothing is lost meanwhile.

 8             Anything else?  I think there was a matter to be raised by the

 9     Defence, but you have decided to postpone that, Mr. Lukic, or was that

10     the same matter?

11             MR. LUKIC:  It is the same matter, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  It's the same --

13             MR. LUKIC:  -- I just have to receive the response from

14     Mr. Traldi.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we will invite the witness to enter the

16     courtroom.

17             Mr. Weber.

18             MR. WEBER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  I just wanted to alert

19     the Trial Chamber that the next witness did receive a 90(E) admonishment

20     and I also see that that admonishment is part of the uploaded transcript

21     that might be offered pursuant to Rule 92 ter.  Just for practical

22     purposes, it might make sense then to admonish him at the outset.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Although he would have read the transcript then, but

24     we'll certainly do that.

25             MR. IVETIC:  And for the purposes of the record, Your Honour, the

Page 33896

 1     next witness is Edin Garaplija, whose appearance is compelled today by a

 2     subpoena issued by Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning.  Good morning, Mr. Garaplija.

 6             THE WITNESS:  Good morning.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Garaplija, before you give evidence, the Rules

 8     require that you make a solemn declaration, that you will speak the

 9     truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  The text is now

10     handed out to you.  May I invite you to make that solemn declaration.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

12     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

13                           WITNESS:  EDIN GARAPLIJA

14                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please be seated, Mr. Garaplija.

16             Mr. Garaplija, you'll be examined by Mr. Ivetic.  You'll find

17     Mr. Ivetic standing to your left.  Mr. Ivetic is a member of the Defence

18     team of Mr. Mladic, but before he starts his examination, I'd like to

19     read to you - and it may not come as a surprise, I understand that it has

20     been read to you before - I'll read to you Rule 90(E) of the Rules of

21     Procedure and Evidence.

22             The text is:

23             "A witness may object to making any statement which might tend to

24     incriminate the witness.  The Chamber may, however, compel the witness to

25     answer the question.  Testimony compelled in this way shall not be used

Page 33897

 1     as evidence in a subsequent prosecution against the witness for any

 2     offence other than false testimony."

 3             Having read this Rule, where it says that you may object to

 4     making any statement which might tend to incriminate you, that you should

 5     address me if that situation arises and then you can address the Chamber

 6     and ask to be relieved from your duty to answer that question and then

 7     we'll decide on such a request.

 8             If that's clear to you, carefully listen to Mr. Ivetic's

 9     questions and please answer them.

10             Mr. Ivetic.

11             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

12                           Examination by Mr. Ivetic:

13        Q.   Good day, sir, can you please first state your full name for the

14     record.

15        A.   Good day.  My name is Edin Garaplija.

16        Q.   And, sir, you are appearing today before us pursuant to a

17     subpoena that this Trial Chamber has issued compelling your attendance;

18     is that correct?

19        A.   Correct.

20             MR. IVETIC:  I would like to call up 1D5308 in e-court.

21        Q.   While we wait for that, what is being called up is a redacted

22     transcript of your testimony in the Karadzic case on the 7th of February,

23     2013.  Mr. Garaplija, have you had an opportunity to review the

24     transcript of your Karadzic testimony which is before you?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 33898

 1        Q.   And do you stand by everything that you said in your prior

 2     testimony during the Karadzic trial as being correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   If I were to ask you the same questions today, would your answers

 5     to those questions be substantially the same as recorded in the Karadzic

 6     transcript?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And pursuant to the solemn declaration that you have taken this

 9     morning, does that mean that the answers you would give, as in your

10     Karadzic transcript, are truthful in nature?

11        A.   Yes.

12             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, I would tender 1D5308 as the next

13     Defence exhibit.  We had originally not sought any of the associated

14     documents, but in discussions with the Prosecution yesterday we agreed to

15     tender 65 ter number 31931 which is referred to in the Karadzic

16     transcript at page 13 through 15 as D2907.

17             MR. WEBER:  That's correct, no objections.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we decide on admission, you said you reviewed

19     the transcript.  Do I understand that you can read the English language?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you review it in English?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for that additional information.

24             Mr. Registrar, two exhibits to be assigned a number to -- the

25     first is the extract of the testimony in the Karadzic case and the other

Page 33899

 1     one is the associated exhibit.  The first one, please.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, 65 ter number 1D05308, the redacted excerpt

 3     of testimony will be Exhibit D980; and 65 ter number 31931 will be

 4     Exhibit D981.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  D980 and D981 are admitted into evidence.

 6             Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, at this time I would read the witness

 8     summary as is customary.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. IVETIC:  Edin Garaplija was a reserve member of the Ministry

11     of the Interior of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina during the start of

12     the war.  From June 1992 onwards, he was a member of the State Security

13     Service of the MUP of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  In June of

14     1996, he was deputy chief of the centre for the secret surveillance and

15     leader of an anti-terrorist team, all within AID, the successor to the

16     state security sector.  He was tasked by AID director Kemal Ademovic to

17     investigate the activities of Nedzad Herenda and the Seve unit.  The Seve

18     unit was established by Alija Delimustafic in April 1992 within the MUP

19     of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a paramilitary unit of the State

20     Security Service.  The existence of this unit within the State Security

21     Service of the MUP was kept a secret.  One of the leaders of and later

22     head of the State Security Service Mr. Nedzad Ugljen managed the work of

23     the Seve unit.  Mr. Ugljen was killed after the existence of this group

24     became known, which was after the witness was arrested in an attempt to

25     hide the investigation of the Seve group.

Page 33900

 1             Herenda was arrested and interviewed by the witness and Herenda

 2     confessed to his participation in the Seve unit and terrorist activities

 3     of the same, including sniping assassinations, setting explosives,

 4     et cetera.  Among these activities was the killing of a French soldier in

 5     1995 from the Executive Council building.  Bosnian officials stated that

 6     the Serb side was responsible for the death of the French soldier shot

 7     while erecting anti-sniping barricades near the Holiday Inn.  Herenda

 8     received payment of 2.000 marks for this killing.  Another incident

 9     Herenda confessed to was the attempted assassination of General

10     Sefer Halilovic which resulted in the killing of his wife and

11     brother-in-law.  The Seve group placed an explosive under the balcony or

12     terrace of General Halilovic.  The public was told that a shell launched

13     by the Serb army, a Maljutka guided projectile had caused the killing and

14     Herenda and the perpetrators left a Maljutka wire at the scene.

15             Other crimes of the Seve unit included the liquidation of

16     captured soldiers and civilians in the centre of Sarajevo committed

17     personally by Herenda for which multiple witnesses were found as part of

18     the investigation.  Herenda also targeted Serbian women in Grbavica with

19     a sniper rifle.  The Seve unit further tried to murder by sniper fire

20     Ismet Bajramovic, a commander of the BiH military police.  Bajramovic was

21     wounded and dislocated to another country for treatment.  They were also

22     involved in a shooting of two sentries during an attempted arrest of

23     Musan Topalovic.

24             After exposing the Seve group and their crimes, the witness was

25     arrested and a show trial organised, in which the internal structures of

Page 33901

 1     the Bosnian forces of law enforcement and justice tried to hide under the

 2     carpet the existence of the Seve unit.

 3             Your Honours, that completes the summary.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Ivetic.

 5             MR. IVETIC:

 6        Q.   Now, Mr. Garaplija, I would like to ask some additional

 7     questions.  In the Karadzic transcript that has now been admitted as

 8     D980, at pages 6 through 7 of the same which relate to transcript pages

 9     33384 through 33385, you talk about the Operation Eagle being undertaken

10     upon the orders of Mr. Kemal Ademovic.  Can you please tell us how it was

11     that Mr. Ademovic approached you about the need to arrest Mr. Herenda?

12        A.   Before I answer your question, I would have two objections to the

13     statement -- to the statement summary that you have just read out.  The

14     first one relates to the passage referring to the murder of Nedzad

15     Ugljen --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, Witness, the summary is not evidence.  Even

17     if there are imprecisions in there, the main purpose of it is to make the

18     audience, to make the public, acquainted with what is approximately in

19     your testimony so that they can follow any follow-up.  It's not evidence

20     itself, so if there are any inaccuracies we leave it then -- we, this

21     Chamber, and the Prosecution will rely exclusively on what we find in the

22     transcript of your testimony.

23             Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

24             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  But in fairness to the

25     witness who is here via subpoena, perhaps I would ask that he be allowed

Page 33902

 1     to at least explain the differences --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I agree with you that since he was subpoenaed

 3     perhaps that he has an opportunity to -- not to add anything, but to just

 4     point at any inaccuracy in the summary.  That means where the summary

 5     does not reflect your testimony.  Nothing to add, nothing to alter.

 6             Please proceed.  You may give your comments or corrections.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the passage referring to the

 8     murder of Nedzad Ugljen, it is stated that Herenda's arrest was carried

 9     out to mask up the Seve unit's activities, but it was just the other way

10     around.  My second objection is that it is not Dusan Topalovic but

11     Musan Topalovic, Caco.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for those corrections.

13             Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

14             MR. IVETIC:

15        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Garaplija.  Now can you tell us about how it was

16     that Mr. Kemal Ademovic approached you about the need to arrest

17     Mr. Herenda.

18        A.   Having become director in the AID in Bosnia and Herzegovina which

19     was the successor of the intelligence services of Bosnia-Herzegovina,

20     Mr. Ademovic asked for a list of all active and reserve members of the

21     agency.  When one of his assistants, Nedzad Ugljen, provided a list of

22     the Seve unit members to him, that one was curtailed, it was redacted,

23     and that name was missing.  And since at the beginning he was the

24     commander of the Special Unit Bosna, he knew that Nedzad Herenda whose

25     name was missing as a member of the Seve unit was responsible for the

Page 33903

 1     execution of the Serbian civilians in the park where the special unit of

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina was located.  When Ademovic saw that Nedzad Herenda's

 3     name was missing from the list, he gave me an order to start the

 4     Operation Eagle.  Its objective was to find Nedzad Herenda, to collect

 5     evidence about his activities, and special emphasis was put on the fact

 6     that he was dangerous.

 7        Q.   And, sir, do you recall what month and year that meeting took

 8     place where you received this task?

 9        A.   The meeting was held two months before my arrest in May 1996, so

10     that the operation to locate and follow Nedzad Herenda started

11     immediately after that.

12        Q.   At that time, did Mr. Ademovic tell you anything further about

13     the type of activities that Herenda was involved in for which he needed

14     to be questioned?

15        A.   I've already said this.  He was suspected of heinous killing and

16     liquidation of the captured civilians and soldiers in the park.  That was

17     the most incriminating information we had about Mr. Herenda.  We learned

18     about the rest after the interview with Nedzad Herenda when he was

19     already under arrest.

20        Q.   Sir, the orders that you had from Mr. Ademovic to arrest

21     Mr. Herenda, were they memorialised in writing?

22        A.   The initial order was verbal and then I got the order in writing.

23        Q.   Can you tell us if any kind of difficulties were encountered when

24     attempting to arrest Mr. Herenda?

25        A.   The Seve unit was set up within the State Security Service as an

Page 33904

 1     independent organisation with very strong backing, so that the operation

 2     to locate and arrest Herenda had to be carried out in strict secrecy and

 3     nobody except the director, me as the leader of the team, and the

 4     operative officers who followed Herenda knew about it.  Because we didn't

 5     know what the chain of command is, who within the service was operatively

 6     issuing orders to the Seve unit.

 7        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, at the time of Herenda's arrest, was he in

 8     possession of any identity documents?

 9        A.   Yes.  He had an official ID.  He had different passports in

10     different names and he had an official police badge as well as special

11     laissez-passer allowing him to move under the territory controlled by the

12     BH army.

13        Q.   And, sir, just in terms of the laissez-passer, from which organ

14     could such a document be obtained?

15        A.   I can't say with certainty which authority issued them and I'm

16     not an expert to decide whether a passport is authentic or forged, so I

17     can't answer this question.

18        Q.   Did Herenda say anything about where he had obtained these

19     identification documents from?

20        A.   Throughout the interview, Herenda claimed that he was a legal

21     member of the service and that the Seve unit was a legal unit set up

22     within police structures, but as I've said before, it was a paramilitary

23     unit installed at the beginning of the war when an agreement had been

24     reached about joint army and police patrols and it was under the mandate

25     of the then-Minister Alija Delimustafic.  That unit was not under the

Page 33905

 1     regular system of command, nor did the legal leadership in the State

 2     Security Service know the membership of that unit or what they were

 3     doing.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Garaplija, could I seek verification -- further

 5     information about one of your previous answers.  You said, when asked

 6     about the identity documents, you said:

 7             "He had different passports in different names ..."

 8             And one answer later you said:

 9             "I can't say with certainty which authority issued them and I'm

10     not an expert to decide on whether" they are authentic or forged.  But

11     from what you saw, let's leave apart whether they were forged or not,

12     from what you saw, who appeared to have issued those identity documents?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not go into the details of

14     who issued these documents because we had only 72 hours under the law to

15     conduct an interview with Nedzad Herenda, and we focused our

16     investigation on the crimes committed by the Seve unit.  So I'm not sure

17     which agency, which organ issued these documents, but I know that

18     normally it is the official police authorities that issue passports.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  You said "several passports."  Were they all BiH

20     passports?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Two passports were BH passports.

22     One was a normal civilian passport and another was official.  Official

23     passports are given to state officials when they go on official missions,

24     and a third passport was, if I remember correctly, a Croatian one.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And the normal passport and the official

Page 33906

 1     passport, were they in different names?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot be sure now about the

 3     names on the passports.  As I said, we didn't go into the details of

 4     these documents, and all that happened 20 years ago.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, though you remember it was under different

 6     names.  I think earlier you said, but let me just look at that --

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but ...

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

 9             MR. IVETIC:

10        Q.   What did Herenda tell you about the original idea or mission of

11     the Seve group?

12        A.   As I've stated before, Nedzad Herenda was convinced that all the

13     missions of the Seve unit were legal, that is to say, approved by the

14     official authorities.  And through our investigation, we established that

15     the Seve unit had two missions.  One, conditionally speaking, was legal,

16     it comprised legal tasks within the Ministry of the Interior such as

17     providing security for VIPs and various consignments that were dispatched

18     to or from Sarajevo; and the second prong was dirty business, so to

19     speak, and that was handled by the renegade members of the Seve unit,

20     including Herenda, by the exiled ones, so to speak.

21        Q.   And these dirty -- this dirty business that you've identified,

22     was it aimed at any particular groups or entities?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

24             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I just raise to express a concern

25     about -- so we have some clarity in the transcript.  I see that

Page 33907

 1     Mr. Ivetic's question clearly asked about a conversation aspect, what did

 2     Herenda tell the witness; and the witness then moved through our

 3     investigation into other matters.  So I believe we're starting to get a

 4     less-clear foundation or area as to the basis of this witness's

 5     knowledge.  I just wanted to raise that concern that -- before the

 6     answers get too complex.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             Mr. Ivetic, I take it that you're also trying to make as clear as

 9     possible what the witness learned from his conversations with Herenda and

10     what he may have learned through other sources during his investigation.

11             Witness, that's important for this Chamber to know and Mr. Ivetic

12     will consider that when formulating his questions.

13             Please proceed.

14             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.

15        Q.   With the advice of the Trial Chamber, I would then ask you, sir,

16     what did Herenda state to you during the interview about who or what was

17     targeted as part of the dirty business that he -- that you mentioned?

18             MR. WEBER:  I just object, leading.  I mean, I think this came up

19     in his last testimony too, the questions were quite often phrased, what

20     did Herenda tell you about X, introducing the topic, as opposed to just

21     eliciting what the conversation was and what was told.  And now we have

22     an inference that this was what was said, but that has not -- actually

23     that fact has not been established yet that that was what was told to the

24     witness by Herenda.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just re-read that.

Page 33908

 1             Mr. Ivetic, any response?

 2             MR. IVETIC:  I thought I was responding to the testimony of the

 3     witness prior, but it's off my screen right now.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness said something about dirty business and

 5     then your question was -- well, as a matter of fact:  Did he tell you

 6     whether, and if so, what the target was of such dirty business.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  That's what you would like to know.

 9             Dirty business, if you say, well, you never know where there's a

10     target for dirty business, that's theoretically true, but practically you

11     may proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

12             Could you answer that question, whether there was any -- whether

13     you were told that there was any specific target; and if so, what that

14     target was?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Seve unit had specific targets,

16     but they also had the freedom to act independently, at least that's what

17     Nedzad Herenda told us during his interview.  The specific targets have

18     been named in this summary and they included the highest -- the top

19     officials, such as UNPROFOR members, when Herenda confessed that he had

20     shot at an UNPROFOR member in the city centre; and the officials of the

21     Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, including the Chief of Staff, Mr. Sefer

22     Halilovic.  He was one of the targets.  Herenda also admitted to a number

23     of other crimes beginning with the crime that he committed in the big

24     park when he executed a group of captured members of the Serbian army as

25     well as a number of civilians after the crime, when he did target

Page 33909

 1     practice shooting at civilians or, as he called them, the women in black

 2     because he was convinced at that time that those were Serb women.

 3             So the unit had both specific targets and the freedom to choose

 4     their own targets in certain cases.

 5             MR. IVETIC:

 6        Q.   I'd like to now focus a little more on the shooting of the French

 7     soldier which is discussed at page 9 of your Karadzic transcript, which

 8     corresponds to transcript page 33387 of the same.  Did the operation

 9     against the French soldier -- did Herenda tell you what the objective of

10     the same was?

11        A.   The purpose of that action was to blame the Serbian side, and

12     Herenda chose a place which was in the line of vision of Serb snipers in

13     the city centre.  That's how he chose his position.

14        Q.   And according to what he told you, did the operation against the

15     French soldier go as planned?

16        A.   In executing that action, he shot the French soldier dead and

17     then a number of officials said that the French soldier had been hit from

18     Serb territory.  So it was a successful cover-up and the Serb side was

19     blamed for that.

20        Q.   Now, at page -- I think it's 12 of your transcript, which is

21     33390, at lines 4 through 8, you indicate that Herenda received amounts

22     to the tune of thousands of German marks for these actions.  Did -- what

23     was your understanding of who paid him or where this money was coming

24     from for his activities?

25        A.   I can't say with certainty who paid Herenda.  He claimed that he

Page 33910

 1     received money for the perpetration of some crimes and the amounts were

 2     in the thousands of German marks.

 3        Q.   Okay.  Now, in page 3 --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  If you say, "I can't say with certainty who paid"

 5     him, why do you say, "I can't say with certainty"?  Did you hear rumours?

 6     Did you hear anything from Mr. Herenda?  Did he tell you anything about

 7     it, although you could not verify that?  Could you tell us what you

 8     learned as -- and how you learned what the possible sources of that

 9     payment may have been.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Herenda always cited Nedzad Ugljen

11     as the person issuing him with orders.  Nedzad Ugljen was one of the

12     leaders of the service, and I suppose he gave him orders and named

13     certain targets and paid him money.  Herenda had contact only with his

14     superior and never mentioned that anyone else ever issued him orders.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

16             MR. IVETIC:

17        Q.   Now, at page 34 of your transcript which is transcript

18     page 33413, you mention Musan Topalovic, whom we have also discussed

19     today -- pardon me, it's page 35 of the underlying transcript.  And I

20     wanted to ask you, first of all:  Did Mr. Topalovic have a nickname?

21        A.   Yes.  His nickname was Caco.

22        Q.   And at the time what --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, could you repeat the number as it

24     appears on the transcript.

25             MR. IVETIC:  It should be transcript page 33413, which ought to

Page 33911

 1     be page 35 of the transcript.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. IVETIC:  And it's lines 4 through 9, I believe.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for that information.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Was the name Caco or Celo?  In the transcript it

 6     says "Celo."

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Musan -- Musan Topalovic was

 8     nicknamed Caco, whereas Celo was a man called Ismet Bajramovic, nicknamed

 9     Celo, and he was another of Herenda's targets.

10             MR. IVETIC:  And I believe, Your Honours, we see that at lines 13

11     through 14 of the Karadzic transcript.

12        Q.   Now, Mr. Garaplija, did Mr. Musan Topalovic have a position that

13     he held at the time of the conflict with -- where the Herenda group

14     became involved?

15        A.   Yes.  Musan Topalovic was at that time commander of the brigade

16     in the surrounded Sarajevo, the brigade of the Army of

17     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

18        Q.   From your discussions with Mr. Herenda, was there any discussion

19     of how this encounter with the sentries at Musan Topalovic's location

20     came about?

21        A.   During his interview, Herenda said clearly that their mission was

22     to hit the guards outside the command of Musan Topalovic, and to do that

23     specifically at a time when a team of inspectors had entered the command

24     in order to take Topalovic to an investigating interview, because he was

25     suspected of certain crimes.  At the same time, Herenda's colleagues from

Page 33912

 1     the Seve unit also shot at different positions of the joint forces that

 2     were supposed to support this team of inspectors so that in those early

 3     moments they faked mutual conflict and both sides fell for it,

 4     unfortunately.  So there were many casualties; namely, the entire team of

 5     inspectors that had entered the command of Musan Topalovic was brutally

 6     killed, and on the other hand, joint forces liquidated a number of the

 7     members of Topalovic's brigade.  This crisis in the city centre lasted

 8     several hours, and then Topalovic was forced to surrender.  He was then

 9     taken to the command of the BH army corps and shortly after was killed in

10     an attempt to escape.

11        Q.   Did your investigative team develop any theory as to why the Seve

12     group had been tasked to do what they did, to fake mutual combat?

13             MR. WEBER:  Objection, calls for speculation.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  That objection is denied.  The question is whether a

15     theory was developed.

16             MR. WEBER:  Well, maybe I'm --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  This is a question of fact.

18             Please proceed.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am not speculating right now

20     about these events.  All these events have been documented.  A lot has

21     been said, both at trials and in the media, about this, and as I said

22     before Nedzad Herenda provided us with information from inside the Seve

23     unit --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, let me stop you there.  The question was

25     whether the investigative team, that is, the investigative team at the

Page 33913

 1     time, developed any theory about why the group had been tasked to do what

 2     they did.  So we're not asking you at this moment to analyse what you may

 3     have learned at trials later, but did at the time the investigative group

 4     develop such theory?  Perhaps you could first tell us whether they did or

 5     not.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Our task was not to come up with

 7     theories; it was to document crimes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Whether it was your task or not, the question simply

 9     is whether you did develop at the time a theory, yes or no.  If not, then

10     we'll move on and perhaps questions will be put to you about what the

11     investigations revealed apart from any developed theory.  Did you develop

12     such a theory at the time?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.  Well, when I say

15     that --

16             MR. IVETIC:  The time.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  -- I should have first looked at the clock.

18             Could you tell us where we are in terms of time, Mr. Ivetic.

19             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, Your Honours, I believe approximately

20     30 minutes.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  30 minutes left.

22             MR. IVETIC:  Yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, you may follow the usher.  We take a break

24     of some 20 minutes.  We'd like to see you back after that.

25                           [The witness stands down]

Page 33914

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take a break and resume at five minutes to

 2     11.00.

 3                           --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

 4                           --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.

 5                           [The witness takes the stand]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  If you're ready, Mr. Ivetic, you may proceed.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 8        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, during your interview of Mr. Herenda, did he

 9     discuss anything about the purpose of the Seve group's creating a fake

10     conflict between the two sides during the arrest of Musan Topalovic,

11     Caco?

12        A.   In every crime committed by the Seve group, you can follow the

13     same pattern.  The purpose was to create as much conflict as possible and

14     to spill as much blood on both sides.

15        Q.   Okay.  Now, at page 33 of the Karadzic transcript which should

16     correlate to transcript page 33411, at lines 11 through 25 you identify

17     the cases that we've talked about, and then at lines -- in relation to

18     attacks by the Seve unit against Bosnian Muslims.  And then you say at

19     line 22 through 25:

20             "These are the two cases that I heard about in my interview and

21     investigation of Nedzad Herenda, but since more than 17 years have

22     passed, I do not exclude a possibility that there were other cases.  I

23     could have mentioned other cases in my interview with the OTP."

24             First of all, can you tell us when it was that you were

25     interviewed by the Office of the Prosecutor of the Tribunal?

Page 33915

 1        A.   In the year 2000.  I sent an appeal to the organisation for human

 2     rights and one letter to The Hague Tribunal.  After that I was contacted

 3     by the investigators of The Hague Tribunal, and they then talked to me

 4     for several days.

 5        Q.   And now do you recall any other instances of the Seve group

 6     targeting persons from Sarajevo, including Muslims, that were discovered

 7     by you as part of your investigation and that you may have talked about

 8     with the OTP during your interview, apart from these instances from the

 9     Karadzic testimony that we have now gone through?

10        A.   In the Karadzic case I answered very specific questions.  When it

11     comes to other cases, at the beginning of today's testimony I said that

12     Herenda told me that he had committed several crimes consisting of

13     opening sniper fire on civilians, both on the Bosnian side as well as on

14     the Serb side.  He opened sniper fire on Grbavica and on the Vrbanja

15     Bridge, more specifically.  For a time they secured the bridge on

16     Grbavica.  Today the bridge is known as the Bridge of Suada Dilberovic

17     and before the war it was the Vrbanja Bridge.  They killed a couple.

18             And the second sniping incident that you have reminded me of was

19     the attempt to execute Ismet Bajramovic, Celo, who was the commander of

20     the military police at the time in the surrounded Sarajevo.  I suppose he

21     would have been a most unpleasant witness of certain events.  Celo

22     survived the murder attempt, although he was shot straight in the heart,

23     very professionally.  However, his life was saved by doctors and then he

24     was moved to a third country for further treatment.  I believe that he

25     was moved to Germany.

Page 33916

 1        Q.   If we could focus to the actions at the Vrbanja Bridge, first of

 2     all, you said for a time they secured the bridge on Grbavica.  Could you

 3     please give us what more details you have as to what they -- what the

 4     securing of the bridge was in relation to, what other activities of the

 5     Seve unit.

 6        A.   Although the war lasted from 1992 to 1995, all the sides were

 7     involved in the trading business amongst themselves.  Certain activities,

 8     for example, the exchanges of civilians, took place at certain points

 9     such as the Vrbanja Bridge.  What was traded there were lots of different

10     commodities, including weapons and drugs that were then brought to

11     Sarajevo which was surrounded.

12        Q.   And in relation to the activities of the Seve at the bridge, the

13     Vrbanja Bridge, you indicated a couple had been killed.  Did you have any

14     more information as to the ethnicity of that couple?

15        A.   Yes.  They were known as the Romeo and Juliet of Sarajevo.  The

16     man was a Serb and the woman was a Bosniak.  They had a lot of money on

17     themselves and they tried to escape surrounded Sarajevo and get to the

18     Serbian side across the bridge.  Herenda, together with his colleague

19     Dragan from the Seve unit, actually targeted that couple and hit them and

20     killed them.  The position from which they opened fire was a couple of

21     hundred metres away as you're looking from the side of the city to the

22     left, that's where the building of the school of electrical engineering

23     was.  It was known as Steleks.  From there, Herenda opened fire --

24     actually, he hit the couple from a sniper.

25        Q.   And --

Page 33917

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we ask again whether this is what you learned

 2     from Herenda or that you -- are there reports written about this or

 3     what's the source of your knowledge?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We learned that from Herenda

 5     himself during the interview in June 1996.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, any other source of knowledge apart from

 7     hearing this from Herenda?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not at that moment.  However, it

 9     was covered by the media after that.  Over the past several years there

10     have also been some TV shows about that; before that, newspapers covered

11     the story quite excessively.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  But, Mr. Ivetic, needless to say that you then have

13     to know where the media got their information from, but please proceed.

14             MR. IVETIC:

15        Q.   If we can go back to the time-period when this couple was shot on

16     the bridge.  Who was blamed for it at that time-period, during the war?

17        A.   Like for a majority of sniping activity, it was the Serbian side

18     that was blamed for that.  To be more precise, during the war nobody was

19     aware of the existence of the Seve unit.  We learned about them only

20     after the war, in 1996.

21        Q.   And you identified in your answer that Herenda worked with a

22     colleague named Dragan.  To your knowledge, was this individual, Dragan,

23     ever arrested or punished for his deeds as part of the Seve group?

24        A.   Interestingly enough, Dragan Bozic, who was a prominent member of

25     the Seve unit, and Nedzad Herenda mentioned him a lot in his statement,

Page 33918

 1     he also used the name Dragan Sosic, he was never put on trial.  As far as

 2     I know, he is still employed at the Central Bank of Bosnia and

 3     Herzegovina.

 4        Q.   Okay.

 5        A.   Although his name is mentioned often, I mentioned it in several

 6     of my statements given both to the local as well as international

 7     institutions.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, could I seek clarification of one of the

 9     previous answers.

10             You were asked who was blamed for this killing and you said it

11     was the Serbian side that was blamed.  Blamed by whom?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as I've already told you, the

13     media and official reports always asserted that sniping of Sarajevo came

14     either from Grbavica or from the surrounding hilltops.  I can't give you

15     an answer about this specific case as to which of the media published it

16     or which of the officials stated it, but in general terms, all the

17     sniping incidents, all the sniping fire opened on Sarajevo was ascribed

18     to the Serbian side.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, did the Serbian media do the same, to say

20     the Serbs are to be blamed for all this; or did they rather blame the

21     other side for sniping or even sniping at their own people?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, the Serbian media

23     said the opposite.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In other words, they claimed that

Page 33919

 1     the other side was responsible for sniping.  It was a period when

 2     everybody blamed the other side for the things that were happening.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  So when you were asked who was blamed for it, the

 4     answer is that, as usual, the one party blamed the other party, rather

 5     than Serbs to be blamed for it because the Serbs would blame the other

 6     party for it?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 9             MR. IVETIC:

10        Q.   Now I want to fast-forward to the circumstances just before your

11     arrest.  At page 6 through 7 of the Karadzic transcript which should

12     correlate to transcript pages 33385 through -6, you briefly say that you

13     were arrested and a rigged show trial was held.  Can you tell me of how

14     and when you first were told that you were to be arrested?

15        A.   After Nedzad Herenda was wounded in an escape attempt and

16     hospitalised, where his wounds were tended to, my colleague from the

17     service, Fikret Masic, conveyed a message to me and the message was that

18     in order to appease the general public there would be arrests.  I and my

19     team were to be arrested.  Because everything had gone too far, as he

20     told me at the time.

21             After such a long time I can only say that at the moment when the

22     order was issued to launch Eagle, the director did not know what crimes

23     the Seve unit had been involved in.  And when he learned that from us,

24     i.e., when he saw it in Herenda's statement, he himself decided that it

25     would be better for everything to be hushed up.  We would then become

Page 33920

 1     scapegoats, we would be arrested and put on a rigged trial.  I'm not

 2     excluding the possibility that somebody had ordered him to do that, and

 3     I'm talking about Director Ademovic.

 4        Q.   You mentioned a colleague Fikret Masic.  What was his position at

 5     the time?

 6        A.   At the time, Masic was the chief of the counter-intelligence

 7     section in the AID.

 8        Q.   And what did Mr. Masic tell you was going to happen during your

 9     trial?

10        A.   He told us to take it easy, to hand over all the documents to

11     him, and that he, i.e., the service and its director, Ademovic, would

12     make sure that we would only spend a few days in the investigation prison

13     and that we would all be free to go after that.

14        Q.   What did he tell you about defence attorneys for you?

15        A.   When I was remanded in custody, Fahrija Karkin, an attorney, came

16     to me and told me that he had been sent by Director Ademovic.  He gave me

17     a code and that's how I knew that he had been sent on the instructions of

18     Director Ademovic.  I accepted him as my lawyer; however, it turned out

19     later that he was the one who was charged with rigging the investigation

20     and the trial that would be conducted against me and my colleagues.

21        Q.   And what, if anything, did Mr. Masic tell you about the judges

22     for the trial?

23        A.   Masic also told me that the judges were all in the cahoots and

24     that they would be very inclined to set us free.  All it took was a

25     little time for the entire situation to calm down and to hush up the very

Page 33921

 1     existence of the Seve group.

 2        Q.   What instructions did Mr. Fikret Masic give you in relation to

 3     the documentation from your investigation of Herenda?

 4        A.   We handed over the entire documentation to Masic, I'm talking

 5     about our record of the Herenda interview.  Masic was very categorical

 6     when he instructed us that if there was anything left, that it had to be

 7     destroyed and burned.  He ordered me that in the trial we should keep

 8     quiet, that we should not mention the service director, and the Eagle

 9     order, and particularly that we shouldn't mention anything that we had

10     learned from Herenda.

11        Q.   Now, sir, can you please give us a chronology and more details

12     about what actually transpired after your arrest and during the trial?

13        A.   From the moment we were arrested until the moment we were finally

14     released from prison, five years lapsed.  I and two of my colleagues were

15     arrested and charged with the kidnapping of Nedzad Herenda, of

16     ill-treating him, and finally that we attempted to kill him.  In that

17     trial we kept quiet, we did not say anything in our defence, because we

18     were convinced that, as Masic and Ademovic told us, the service would

19     talk to the judges who controlled the trial and that we would finally be

20     set free.  However, all the time the charges against us were -- we were

21     being set up through the lawyer that was supposed to defend us, and we

22     turned out to be criminals and Nedzad Herenda was portrayed as a model

23     citizen and even a hero by some media.

24             The banality of the trial and the way it was staged was

25     acknowledged by the Court of Human Rights.  When I realised that I was

Page 33922

 1     eventually sentenced to 14 years in prison and after I myself had

 2     survived two attempts of murder within the prison, I sent an appeal to

 3     the institution for human rights.  There were six foreign judges on the

 4     panel and the president of that panel was Judge Michele Picard.  I sent

 5     an appeal and in my appeal, I provided all the details and also that I

 6     was never given the right to appeal against my judgement, which was a

 7     gross violation of my human rights.

 8             The Court of Human Rights voted in my favour.  The six foreign

 9     judges over-voted the six local judges appointed by the three ruling

10     parties.  They agreed to confirm my sentence.  In other words, the court

11     judged in our favour and sent the whole case for re-trial.

12             However, when we were brought to the Supreme Court, after a

13     certain while I realised that the re-trial was also rigged because I

14     recognised one of the judges of whom Masic said that he was the service's

15     associate.  In his introductory statement, that judge said that the

16     formal rights and requirements had been met because we were brought to

17     court but we were not allowed to say anything in our defence.  That's

18     when I realised that the trial would be rigged and that nothing would be

19     different.

20             At that moment a person approached me, a man of whom I'd never

21     heard before, I'd never seen him before, he introduced himself to me as a

22     lawyer from The Hague Tribunal.  Later I met him and I learned that his

23     name was Carl Kenning, he was one of the investigators who had previously

24     interviewed me.  He told me that he had heard everything and he had seen

25     it with his own eyes and that that would not be the end of the violation

Page 33923

 1     of my human rights and that he would report back to The Hague Tribunal.

 2             And then an unprecedented thing happened.  I was brought for the

 3     third time before the Supreme Court.  I was then allowed to mount my

 4     defence and to lodge an official document on Operation Eagle.  That's

 5     when my sentence was altered and I was sentenced to the time already

 6     served in prison; in other words, I was sentenced for some lesser crimes.

 7             Soon thereafter, we were all released, first myself and then my

 8     colleagues.

 9        Q.   When was Mr. Nedzad Ugljen killed?

10        A.   Soon after our arrest, perhaps two months into custody, i.e., two

11     months into isolation because we were not allowed any contacts with the

12     outer world.  We did not have access to newspapers or any other media.

13     Our only contact was through the lawyer that had been assigned to us.

14     From one of the guards who guarded us, I learned that Nedzad Ugljen had

15     been killed as an unwelcome witness of all the happenings and the

16     activities of the Seve group as well as the events surrounding the

17     rigging of my process -- my trial and the trial of my colleagues.

18        Q.   To your knowledge, was anyone ever arrested or charged with the

19     killing of Mr. Ugljen?

20        A.   As far as I know, nobody was ever charged or arrested for

21     Ugljen's killing, although he was involved in the police and security

22     missions of highest order before the war and during the war.

23        Q.   Sir, apart from your interview in the year 2000 to the Office of

24     the Prosecutor and your testimony in the Karadzic case in 2013, did you

25     give any other statements to judicial organs about the things you have

Page 33924

 1     testified here about today?

 2        A.   Yes.  I provided statements to local courts, i.e., to the

 3     cantonal prosecutor's office in Sarajevo, that was very quickly after my

 4     release from prison, as well as several statements to the authorised

 5     police organs who contacted me after my turned for redress to the Court

 6     of Human Rights.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, your estimate was 30 minutes, I think,

 8     before the break.  We are at that point approximately now.  Could you

 9     tell us --

10             MR. IVETIC:  One question.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  One question, please.

12             MR. IVETIC:

13        Q.   Sir, my final question:  What is your motive for talking publicly

14     about the events relating to Mr. Herenda and the Seve group and

15     testifying now at two trials about the activities of Herenda and the Seve

16     group?

17        A.   The Seve group, according to all that I learned, followed the

18     same pattern of development like other paramilitary groups on all sides,

19     including the Red Berets.  Its objective and goal was to spill as much

20     blood as possible and to blame each other as much as possible in order to

21     make life together impossible and to inflict as much destruction as

22     possible.  And my only motive is for those who committed crimes to be

23     charged with those crimes instead of those crimes being ascribed to other

24     people.

25        Q.   Sir, I have no more questions for you.  I thank you for both your

Page 33925

 1     time and your testimony.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Ivetic.

 3             Witness, I have one follow-up question which is directly related

 4     to the last question that was put to you by Mr. Ivetic.  You told us what

 5     your motive was for talking publicly about these events.  What then

 6     explains that you wanted to be subpoenaed before appearing before this

 7     Court?  Why didn't you voluntarily meet the request of the Defence to

 8     come and testify?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the answer to your

10     question is rather simple.  All the media in Sarajevo and in Bosnia knew

11     when the Karadzic and Mladic Defence called me to testify, and I don't

12     know how they knew, but even before I got official documentation that I

13     should appear, the media reported that I was invited by the Defence of

14     criminals Karadzic and Mladic and that I was about to testify in their

15     defence, to help them, which is not true.  I'm not here to defend anyone

16     or to help them.  I responded both times to the invitation of the

17     Trial Chamber.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but you insisted on that.  You didn't meet the

19     request by the Defence and you could have publicly stated that even

20     though called by the Defence, that you would be a witness of the truth

21     and therefore it doesn't matter whether you're called by the one party or

22     by the other.  Why did you insist on being subpoenaed?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I never insisted.  Both times the

24     Defence teams contacted me, asking me to come voluntarily as a witness,

25     and I refused.  And this is documented in writing.  And then the subpoena

Page 33926

 1     was issued at the request of the Defence team.  I didn't even know what a

 2     subpoena was until I got one.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the same question.  Why did you refuse if you

 4     say:  This is what I want, to tell publicly about the events?  Under

 5     those circumstances, especially if you wouldn't know what a subpoena

 6     would be, the logic would be that you say:  This is what I wish, so

 7     therefore if they invite me I'll do it, rather than to refuse.  That's

 8     what we're trying to understand.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't refuse to come.  I gave my

10     statement to OTP investigators 15 years ago, in 2000, and I stand by that

11     statement today --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  A second ago you said you were invited to come

13     voluntarily and you refused.  So to say that you didn't refuse is --

14     "both times the Defence teams contacted me, asking me to come voluntarily

15     as a witness, and I refused ..."

16             So to say one line later that you didn't refuse comes a bit as a

17     surprise.  Any further comments on what I just said?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps I misspoke.  When I said

19     "refused," I didn't mean refused to make a statement, but refusing to be

20     a Defence witness.  I mentioned that all the media had ...

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you for those answers.

22             Mr. Weber, are you ready to cross-examine the witness?

23             MR. WEBER:  Yes, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Garaplija, you'll now be cross-examined by

25     Mr. Weber.  You'll find Mr. Weber to your right.  Mr. Weber is counsel

Page 33927

 1     for the Prosecution.

 2             Please proceed, Mr. Weber.

 3             MR. WEBER:  Thank you, Your Honours.

 4                           Cross-examination by Mr. Weber:

 5        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Garaplija.

 6        A.   Good morning.

 7        Q.   The information that you have recounted in your previous

 8     testimony and in court today about the Seve group, those were things

 9     Mr. Herenda supposedly told you in June of 1996; is that right?

10        A.   Right.

11        Q.   Your interview of Mr. Herenda occurred between the afternoon of

12     25 June 1996 and lasted until the morning of 29 June 1996; correct?

13        A.   That's correct.  Under the law of the agency --

14        Q.   Sir --

15        A.   -- for investigation and documentation, we had 72 hours --

16        Q.   Sir, I'll move rather quickly through things today, so I will go

17     through them.  Mr. Herenda was not free to go during this time?

18        A.   That's right, he was arrested.

19        Q.   Meaning he was in your custody?

20        A.   That's right.

21        Q.   You'd never had a conversation with Nedzad Herenda before you

22     took him into custody on the 25th of June, 1996; right?

23        A.   Not about the activities of the Seve unit.

24        Q.   Are you saying that you had talked to Nedzad Herenda before the

25     25th of June, 1996?

Page 33928

 1        A.   No, I never talked to him before, but I had seen him around the

 2     building of the headquarters of the service.

 3        Q.   When you took him into custody, you took Mr. Herenda to a secret

 4     location between the 25th and the 29th of June; right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   You did not bring him into your headquarters or process

 7     Mr. Herenda for any charges; right?

 8        A.   I've said earlier that it was a secret operation and we didn't

 9     know who else within the service was involved, that's why we chose a

10     secret location to interview him.

11        Q.   You did not bring him into your headquarters or process

12     Mr. Herenda for any charges; right?

13        A.   No.

14        Q.   To the best of your knowledge, the Seve group consisted of

15     approximately ten people at the beginning of the war and possibly grew to

16     about 30 people by the end of the war; correct?

17        A.   That's the total number of the Seve unit, but the number of men

18     responsible for the crimes I've mentioned was much smaller, it was three

19     to five.

20             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Weber, the previous answer is not absolutely

21     clear.  The "no" could relate to your question "right?" or the sentence

22     before that.  You should clarify that.

23             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, thank you very much.  And I'll just

24     break it up.

25        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, I'm going back to a question that I asked you and

Page 33929

 1     I'll just separate it.  When you took Mr. Herenda into custody, you did

 2     not bring him into your headquarters; correct?

 3        A.   No, we did not bring him to the headquarters of the service.  We

 4     brought him instead to a location that was also a base of the service.

 5        Q.   Mr. Herenda was not processed for any charges; correct?

 6        A.   We filed no criminal complaint against Herenda because it was not

 7     our job.  Our job was only to collect information.  Criminal complaints

 8     are only filed by our leaders, by our superiors.

 9        Q.   The Trial Chamber has received a portion of your testimony in the

10     Karadzic case.  I'd like to ask you a more broad question that relates to

11     your entire Karadzic testimony.  Were all of your answers throughout your

12     entire Karadzic testimony truthful and accurate?

13        A.   Sitting here, I can't guarantee that every sentence was recorded

14     exactly as I said it, but everything that concerns the Seve unit, in that

15     part my testimony is absolutely truthful and accurate.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, Witness, whether it was recorded exactly as

17     you said, that is something we can verify because we have the audio of

18     your testimony.  The question simply is:  Did at any point, did you not

19     tell the truth when you testified in the Karadzic case?  And don't worry

20     about how it was recorded.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If the Prosecutor means the

22     information I provided about the second-instance trial in the agency for

23     human rights, I supplemented that testimony, saying that the trial

24     judgement was not in our favour, but the appeals judgement was.  I would

25     like to know if that's what the Prosecutor meant in his question.  As for

Page 33930

 1     the rest of my evidence, I maintain that it is correct.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't know whether that's a specific concern to

 3     you, Mr. Weber, but --

 4             MR. WEBER:  I was asking him a broad --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 6             MR. WEBER:  Just at this stage I was asking him a broad question.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  So apart from -- did you tell the truth when you

 8     testified in Karadzic?  That's the simple question.  Or is there any

 9     point where you say, well, it may -- I may not have told the truth or not

10     the whole truth?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my testimony in the Karadzic

12     case, I was telling the truth, but there is a moment when I was

13     explaining my position and my appeal to the Court of Human Rights.  I had

14     two suits before the Court of Human Rights, once when I was in custody,

15     that was -- that judgement was not in my favour; the other one when I was

16     freed was in my favour.  That's the only thing that was in dispute with

17     the Prosecution, but I didn't make any mistakes and didn't overlook

18     anything in my testimony.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's leave it to that for the time being.

20             Mr. Weber, I leave it in your hands.

21             MR. WEBER:  Okay.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

23             MR. WEBER:

24        Q.   And just so we have clarification, in the Karadzic case, you

25     discussed the criminal proceedings related to your detention of

Page 33931

 1     Nedzad Herenda in June 1996; right?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   I have a few questions before -- for context before we look at

 4     your previous testimony, and I know you've touched on some of these today

 5     already.  After Herenda's interview in June of 1996, you were arrested

 6     for mistreating Nedzad Herenda while you had him in custody; correct?

 7        A.   That's what the trumped-up indictment said, that we had been

 8     arrested for the attempt to murder and kidnap Nedzad Herenda.

 9        Q.   The specific charges that were initially brought against you were

10     abduction and attempted murder; right?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Charges related to Mr. Herenda's custody were also brought

13     against two of your associates, Haris Pezo, P-e-z-o, and Refik Muran;

14     correct?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Mr. Pezo and Mr. Muran were with you during the detention of

17     Mr. Herenda; correct?

18        A.   Yes, and not only them but two other operatives who were

19     involved.

20        Q.   Just so we keep on going with the proceedings here, the BiH State

21     Court initially convicted you and your associates for the abduction and

22     attempted murder of Mr. Herenda; right?

23        A.   That's not true.  We were convicted by the Cantonal Court of

24     Sarajevo as a lower court, and the Supreme Court of the Federation in

25     these bogus proceedings made their judgement.  And after the proceedings

Page 33932

 1     before the Court of Human Rights, there were two more appearances before

 2     the Supreme Court --

 3        Q.   Sir, I'm just trying to have it clear before we lump all the

 4     proceedings together.  You were initially convicted by the cantonal court

 5     for abduction and attempted murder; right?

 6        A.   That's right.  We were convicted of abduction and attempted

 7     murder while we chose to remain silent.

 8        Q.   Now, going onward, after the proceedings before the BiH

 9     Supreme Court and the Human Rights Chamber, the charge of abduction was

10     overturned and your convictions were upheld for the crimes of attempted

11     murder and maltreatment in the discharge of duty; right?  That was the

12     final outcome of what you were convicted for?

13        A.   There is no Supreme Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  There is only

14     the Supreme Court of the Federation, and it's before that court that we

15     fought our legal battle.  And there were two trials.  After the second

16     time and after the involvement of The Hague Tribunal, the verdict reduced

17     our sentence and some counts were dismissed.  The remaining count was

18     abuse of authority, that is to say, attempted murder.  So the sentence

19     was reduced from 14 years to seven.  And after that, they granted me

20     clemency, as they put it, so they released me immediately after I've

21     served five years, one month, and one day.

22             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, I'm about to get into some materials.

23     I don't know -- I know it's a minute or two early but --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We are close to the time where we would take a

25     break.

Page 33933

 1             MR. WEBER:  Yeah.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take that break now.  The witness may follow

 3     the usher.  I --

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  I already announced that after the break, on from

 6     ten minutes to 1.00, I'll be unable to sit and my colleagues will decide

 7     whether or not they'll continue to hear the case in my absence, which

 8     will be of short duration, that is, only the remainder of this day.  We

 9     take a break and we resume at quarter past 12.00.

10                           --- Recess taken at 11.52 a.m.

11                           --- On resuming at 12.18 p.m.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  While we're waiting for the witness to be escorted

13     into the courtroom, I would briefly deal with a matter unrelated to that.

14     It's about the Rule 92 ter motion for Nikola Erceg.  The Chamber notes

15     that on the 15th of September, 2014, the Defence filed a motion tendering

16     55 associated exhibits with Witness Nikola Erceg.  On the 28th of March,

17     2015, the Defence sent the Chamber a revised list of exhibits containing

18     60 associated exhibits, including 11 exhibits which have already been

19     admitted into evidence.  Pursuant to the Chamber's guide-lines, the

20     Chamber hereby invites the Defence to consider reducing the number of

21     associated exhibits by, for example, tendering some of these documents

22     with the witness during examination-in-chief.

23                           [The witness takes the stand]

24             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, if I may, the Prosecution will be

25     calling up Exhibit D980, page 8.

Page 33934

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, you may proceed.

 2             MR. WEBER:  I believe Exhibit D980 is actually on the screen.  If

 3     I could please have page 8 of that document.  Thank you.

 4        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, this is part of your previous testimony in the

 5     Karadzic case.  On this page at the top you stated:

 6             "And only after two years of serving sentences -- these sentences

 7     we were given, I addressed the International Court for Human Rights which

 8     had a branch office in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It was called the Human

 9     Rights Hall, presided by a French Judge, Michele Picard.  Our judgement

10     was rendered null and void by that human rights court and a judge

11     rapporteur, Giovanni Grasso.  This court ordered a re-trial, following

12     which we were released from prison and pardoned in some way."

13             This was not a true statement since the judgement was not

14     rendered null and void; right?

15        A.   I said a moment ago the verdict was not quashed, it was only

16     requalified so that we received practically the sentence that we had

17     already served.  It's true that in 2008 we made our first appeal before

18     the Human Rights Chamber --

19             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  1998.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And that process took eight years,

21     so that the judgement was made only in 2002.

22             MR. WEBER:

23        Q.   Sir, if you could please focus on my question.  You've given

24     explanations for this a couple times already.  This statement that you

25     gave in the Karadzic case was not true, your judgement was not rendered

Page 33935

 1     null and void?

 2        A.   The judgement of the Supreme Court of the Federation was quashed

 3     and there was a re-trial, I've already explained that, and there were in

 4     fact two re-trials.  The first time, a lawyer from The Hague was involved

 5     and looked into that first re-trial and found deficiencies, so there was

 6     a new re-trial.

 7        Q.   Sir, you're giving explanations again.  Just really simple:  Are

 8     you saying that this answer was the truth or are you acknowledging that

 9     this answer was not the truth?

10        A.   That answer was not incomplete, but it's truthful.  Now I gave a

11     complete answer and explained how it all went.

12        Q.   Okay.

13             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 31925,

14     e-court page 26.

15        Q.   This is another part of your testimony in the Karadzic case.  It

16     was a portion that was not tendered by the Defence, and before I ask you

17     any questions about this extra material:  Prior to your testimony today,

18     did you review your entire Karadzic transcript or just the excerpts that

19     were provided to you?

20        A.   I reviewed what the Defence team gave me.

21        Q.   Were there portions of that transcript that were redacted or had

22     black markings over it?

23        A.   Well, I cannot be precise about this, whether there were or

24     weren't redactions, I mean.

25        Q.   All right.  I'd like to direct you to line 12 of this page --

Page 33936

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  But before we continue.

 2             Witness, when was it that you reviewed your Karadzic transcript?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After arriving last Friday, I

 4     reviewed the transcript.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  You must have noticed whether there were thick

 6     black -- blackened-out portions.  Do you remember that?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't pay attention to the

 8     details.  I wasn't so careful.  I don't rule out the possibility that

 9     there were some blacked-out portions.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  If I would show you from a distance how that looks

11     like, could you then -- would that refresh your memory whether you found

12     any such thing in the -- and I show to the witness at this moment

13     page 33401 at a distance of some 5, 6 metres.  Is this what you saw?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, there was no such thing.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you assist us, Mr. Ivetic, as to whether the

16     witness was given the -- and I showed him this just for you to know as

17     well.  Even from a distance you can see that you hardly can miss the

18     blackened-out portions.  Did you show the witness the redacted version or

19     did you show the witness the unredacted version?

20             MR. IVETIC:  We had both with us and I don't know which one the

21     witness had.  I also had with me a copy of the recording of the audio,

22     which he did not say he needed because there was already a recording on

23     YouTube of the B/C/S audio of the same.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but if you're seeking the attestation of a

25     witness, wouldn't it be good to know exactly what he reviewed so we know

Page 33937

 1     exactly what he attested to?

 2             MR. IVETIC:  Well, Your Honour, we've had this procedure with the

 3     Prosecution witnesses where I made exactly --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I'm --

 5             MR. IVETIC:  -- that same point as Your Honour, and Your Honour

 6     told me that's the wrong way to do it.  So I'm a little confused as to

 7     what the right way is.  We've had witnesses from the Prosecution that

 8     have listened to the entirety of their testimony and then only a portion

 9     of that testimony has been brought in by the Prosecution.  I objected to

10     one such witness and you overruled that objection, Your Honour.  So I'm

11     confused now as to what the procedure is.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  I think, as a matter of fact, you're referring to

13     audio, aren't you?

14             MR. IVETIC:  Yes.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I think I asked the witness whether he had reviewed

16     the written version and whether what is true for the audio, where it's

17     difficult just to cut out the relevant portions, whereas in writing

18     that's different.  But as a matter of fact, I didn't ask you whether you

19     were unhappy with any previous ruling, but you apparently think that

20     it's -- when seeking the attestation on the basis of a written

21     transcript, that you would say it's not relevant to know what exactly the

22     witness attested to in terms of what was shown to him.

23             MR. IVETIC:  That's not what I'm saying, Your Honour.  I'm saying

24     that we had an instance where it was my understanding that the

25     Prosecution had wanted to present part of the transcript for their case,

Page 33938

 1     the cross-examination, and had suggested to lead that with the witness

 2     and I --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's not an answer to my question because my

 4     question was:  Wouldn't it be good to know exactly what he reviewed so we

 5     know exactly what he attested to?  That was my question.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Not whether you disagreed with any previous ruling.

 8     Could I receive an answer to that question.

 9             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, Your Honour, I think I gave that answer --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

11             MR. IVETIC:  -- I said "yes, Your Honour," about two lines ago.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's leave it to that.

13             Please proceed, Mr. Weber.

14             MR. WEBER:  Yes, Your Honours.

15        Q.   Sir, directing your attention to the page before you, which is

16     transcript page 33404 in the Karadzic proceedings, you were asked:

17             "Okay.  And you referred in your direct examination to your

18     arrest and conviction following this interview with Herenda.  Just to be

19     precise, you were arrested specifically for the mistreatment of Herenda

20     in the course of the interview, in particular abduction, maltreatment in

21     discharge of duty, and attempted murder; right?"

22             Your answer:

23             "Yes.  That was a bogus indictment that was quashed later before

24     the Human Rights Hall, and the domestic judicial institutions were

25     ordered to conduct a re-trial where a verdict, a conviction, was handed

Page 33939

 1     down for overstepping official authority and the unlawful imprisonment

 2     that we endured, one year, one month, and one day.  After that, I

 3     personally instituted another proceedings before the Human Rights Hall

 4     that resulted in the quashing of the entire judgement, and I have since

 5     never been tried for anything."

 6             Mr. Garaplija, this answer was untrue because the Human Rights

 7     Chamber did not quash the entire judgement; right?

 8        A.   Correct.  This is a mistake.

 9        Q.   Sir --

10        A.   -- I've not seen this before and when I spoke about --

11        Q.   Sir, I'll read on.  You were next asked, and this continues on to

12     the next page:

13             "Q.  Well, in fact, Mr. Garaplija, what you've just described is

14     untrue.  You were initially convicted, as you say.  Your case did go

15     before the Bosnian Human Rights Chamber in 2000.  They did find a

16     violation of your rights.  There were then further proceedings at the

17     Bosnian Supreme Court in 2000 where they quashed the conviction for

18     abduction, maintained the conviction for mistreatment in discharge of

19     duty and attempted murder, and then you brought a further application to

20     the Bosnian Human Rights Chamber, and, in 2002, that chamber found that

21     there had been no violation of your rights in the 2000 Bosnian Supreme

22     Court judgement that had convicted you for mistreatment and discharge of

23     duty and attempted murder.  That's actually what happened, isn't it?"

24             Your answer:

25             "That's precisely what I said, except I didn't mention ... in the

Page 33940

 1     second proceedings I was found guilty of overstepping my official

 2     authorities, not attempted murder.  So the abduction and attempted murder

 3     did not feature in the appeals proceedings.  And shortly afterward, I was

 4     released from the state prison."

 5             Just stopping here before I read on, during this specific answer

 6     in your Karadzic testimony, you are acknowledging that you did not

 7     provide complete information to the court; right?

 8        A.   If you look at this just as a mistake as the second trial only --

 9     but if you look at -- then it's correct.  But if you look at the whole

10     chronology, then you can see that I'm basing my words on the judgement of

11     the Human Rights Chamber, after which my sentence was altered and I was

12     released.  I'm talking about two trials before the Human Rights Chamber.

13     The first one resulted in this:  The panel of six judges judged in our

14     favour, in favour of our appeal.  This is what saved our lives, this is

15     what is important, and as a result, we were released and I'm able to sit

16     before you today.

17        Q.   All right.  Let's read on.  Next question:

18             "Well, in your earlier answer you had said that in the second

19     proceedings before the Human Rights Chamber, that those proceedings

20     resulted in the quashing of the entire judgement.  That's entirely false.

21     That Human Rights Chamber decision upheld your conviction; right?"

22             You answered:

23             "That is correct.  Perhaps I told it wrong, but I said I was

24     never again tried in this case.  That's what I meant."

25             Sir, the fact is that you did not provide truthful testimony

Page 33941

 1     about the outcome of the proceedings against you; correct?

 2        A.   Not correct.  In the second proceedings I asked for compensation

 3     and for the quashing of the sentence.  The second sentence was conducted

 4     after we were released from prison and our appeal was not accepted, i.e.,

 5     there was no trial.  No court was ordered to conduct a trial.  But very

 6     soon after that appeal, the Human Rights Chamber was disbanded as well as

 7     its participation in the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the

 8     prosecutor's office of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 9        Q.   During your previous testimony you were also shown the final 2002

10     decision by the Human Rights Chamber; correct?  You remember that?

11        A.   You are talking about the year 2002.  This is the second

12     decision.  And I, on the other hand, am talking about the first decision

13     which was passed in the year 2000, hence the misunderstanding.  That's

14     why we are talking at cross-purposes.  I've just tried to explain to

15     you --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  First of all, slow down.  Second, you were asked

17     whether during your previous testimony you were also shown the final 2002

18     decision by the Human Rights Chamber.  Was that shown to you during that

19     testimony or was that not shown to you?  Or don't you remember?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember that it was shown,

21     but it was mentioned as the second decision in my case.  And when you

22     look at the year, you can see that it was the second decision because the

23     first was passed in the year 2000 --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  You don't remember, that's an answer to my question.

25     Mr. Weber will put further questions to you.

Page 33942

 1             MR. WEBER:

 2        Q.   In the proceedings before the Human Rights Chamber in -- that was

 3     eventually decided in 2002, you made claims you could not support; right?

 4        A.   What claims do you have in mind, Mr. Prosecutor?

 5        Q.   Sir, I'm asking you a broad question.  Before that chamber --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  At such an abstract level, Mr. Weber, that you

 7     should specify what claims you had on your mind.

 8             MR. WEBER:  Okay.

 9        Q.   Well, one of the unsupported claims you made before the Human

10     Rights Chamber was that a Supreme Court judge was collaborating with the

11     Bosnian secret service to frame you for the mistreatment of Herenda in

12     1996.  That was one of your claims; right?

13        A.   That's correct, and I did say that about Judge Malik

14     Hadziomerovic [as interpreted] who was a judge rapporteur.  And after the

15     observations made by the lawyer from The Hague Tribunal, he was withdrawn

16     from that trial and he did not appear as one of the judges during my

17     third re-trial.  The judge's name was Malik Hadziomerovic.

18        Q.   Sir, I put it to you that that wasn't the case and actually the

19     claims that you made related to this judge were unsupported before the

20     Human Rights Chamber?

21        A.   I don't know what is the basis of your claim that this is not

22     correct, but I told you that Fikret Masic has told me that that judge was

23     responsible for our liberation and that never materialised.  Based on

24     that statement --

25        Q.   Could the --

Page 33943

 1        A.   -- I asked for the exclusion of that judge.

 2        Q.   I understand you asked for it.

 3             MR. WEBER:  Let's look at 65 ter 31923.

 4        Q.   This is the 12 April 2002 Human Rights Chamber decision.  We see

 5     the panel that it was delivered by and it's signed by Judge Picard.  The

 6     full procedural history of your proceedings before the BiH Supreme Court

 7     and Human Rights Chamber are contained in this decision so I'm not going

 8     to discuss them further with you.  Seeing this document, do you recall

 9     having seen this during your previous testimony?

10        A.   Yes, I'm familiar with the document.  In 2002, when I was already

11     free, it was handed to me after the session of this panel together with

12     the separate opinion of Judge Giovanni Grasso, which was a dissenting

13     opinion.

14             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have page 9.

15        Q.   Directing your attention to paragraph 51 that states:

16             "The applicant's representative, in answer to the Chamber's

17     request, stated that he had challenged one of the judges in the renewed

18     appellate proceedings because he is allegedly a collaborator with the

19     secret service ..."

20             I'm just going to stop there.  This is what we were just talking

21     about, your representative asserted as part of these proceedings before

22     the Human Rights Chamber; right?

23        A.   That's correct.

24        Q.   The decision goes on to state:

25             "Further, he claims that he has 'reliable information' about his

Page 33944

 1     accusation.  The applicant did not disclose this information and has

 2     failed to provide the Chamber with any evidence."

 3             The next paragraph then rejects this accusation as manifestly

 4     ill-founded.  The fact is you had no support for your conspiracy theory;

 5     right?

 6             MR. IVETIC:  Objection --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic.

 8             MR. IVETIC:  -- especially if he is relying upon this document

 9     since the document itself has contradictory information in another part

10     of it.  So is he relying upon the document as a whole or in that one

11     paragraph?

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I take it you will deal with that in

13     re-examination, but already, Mr. Weber, you know what to expect -- if you

14     have taken out of context the portion, then you know what happens, and if

15     you want to anticipate on that, of course you may do so.

16             MR. WEBER:

17        Q.   The fact is that the Chamber, as it says here, rejected the

18     applicant's complaint about the lack of impartiality of one of the

19     judges.  That's what that decision was?

20        A.   Correct.  But I don't know why we are talking about the second

21     judgement.  Why doesn't the Prosecutor show you the first judgement of

22     the Human Rights Chamber which provides a very detailed account of the

23     entire case because this judgement and the second proceedings before the

24     Human Rights Chamber was conducted after I was released and after we

25     applied for a re-trial.  We wanted everything to start from scratch and

Page 33945

 1     that new facts would be taken into account; however, we were not granted

 2     that leave.

 3        Q.   Sir, please focus on my question.  Is it correct that since 2008

 4     [sic] you've been making claims that there was this big conspiracy, where

 5     everyone from the trial judge in your initial proceedings before the

 6     cantonal court who found you guilty, to your own lawyers who were

 7     defending you and presenting an alibi that you were in Tuzla during

 8     Herenda's interview, to the prosecutor who was seeking a conviction for

 9     your mistreatment of Herenda during the interview --

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  You should slow down.

11             MR. WEBER:

12        Q.   To even a Supreme Court judge and your former co-workers were all

13     collaborating to not have your story about Herenda's interview come out.

14     That's what you've been claiming since 1998, right, since your initial

15     conviction was upheld?

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, your recorded as initially referring to

17     "since 2008" and now "since 1998."

18             MR. WEBER:  Thank you for the clarification.  I meant since

19     1998 --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             MR. WEBER:  -- when his original conviction was upheld.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  That's clear.

23             Could you please answer the question.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Besides confusing 2008 and 1998,

25     the Prosecutor obviously confused two different judgements of the

Page 33946

 1     Human Rights Chamber.  I stand by the first judgement which was passed in

 2     2000.  The second judgement in 2002 is not relevant at all.  I just

 3     wanted to --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, would you please focus on the question.

 5     The question was whether you claimed since 1998 what Mr. Weber told us,

 6     not to further explain about this judgement, but whether those were the

 7     claims you made.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.  Since 1998, since the

 9     month of September of that year, I have firmly stood by my assertion and

10     I'm repeating it today.

11             MR. WEBER:

12        Q.   You and your two colleagues maltreated Herenda while he was in

13     your custody; right?

14        A.   Not correct.

15             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have page 12 of this

16     document.

17        Q.   In paragraph 71 of the Human Rights Chamber's 2002 decision it

18     states:

19             "The Chamber recalls that the Supreme Court established that the

20     applicant 'hit the injured party'" in reference to Herenda "'with his

21     fist, bound him to the pipe of the radiator, inserted a wooden club

22     between his hands when he was already cuffed and hit him on different

23     parts of his body.'  The Supreme Court further stated that 'the injured

24     party was subject to physical and psychical harm' and thereby assessed

25     that 'these actions fulfil the characteristics of maltreatment in

Page 33947

 1     discharge of duty.'"

 2             The fact is you were found guilty of maltreating Herenda; right?

 3        A.   In order to understand this, you have to know how the Human

 4     Rights Chamber functioned.  The way it functioned was --

 5        Q.   Sir -- sir --

 6        A.   -- that both sides lodged their appeals in order to make their

 7     positions known.  Now what you are --

 8        Q.   The fact is the Human Rights Chamber upheld your conviction for

 9     maltreatment in the discharge of duty; right?  Simple question.

10        A.   Not right.  The Human Rights Chamber did not uphold it, but

11     rather it did not order the case to be sent for re-trial.  But it didn't

12     uphold the original judgement.  It dropped the whole thing.  And what you

13     just read is a quote from the rigged indictment that the Supreme Court of

14     Bosnia and Herzegovina tried to defend twice and owing to your colleagues

15     from the Prosecutor, Mr. Kenning more precisely, that didn't happen.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, I announced that I was not available --

17             MR. WEBER:  Yes, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and I think, as a matter of fact, that my

19     colleagues would prefer to take the break now, then to resume at ten

20     minutes past 1.00 and then to inform you whether they have decided or not

21     decided to continue to hear the case, and then if they would have decided

22     to do so, to continue until quarter past 2.00.

23             MR. WEBER:  Very well, Your Honour.  Just to have a fully clean

24     break, is there any way I could please tender this document into

25     evidence?  It's 65 ter 31923.

Page 33948

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P7279, Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence.

 4             Witness, we'll take a break of 20 minutes.  You may follow the

 5     usher.

 6                           [The witness stands down]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Usually I say "we resume," but the court resumes at

 8     ten minutes past 1.00.

 9                           --- Recess taken at 12.52 p.m.

10                           --- On resuming at 1.13 p.m.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  May the witness please be escorted into the

12     courtroom.

13             In the meantime, I just wanted to say that Judge Orie may not

14     have mentioned it but it is important to place on the record that he's

15     not with us this afternoon due to urgent personal business.  As a result,

16     Judge Fluegge and I have decided, in the interests of justice, to carry

17     on with the trial.  And as a result, therefore, we are going to be

18     sitting pursuant to Rule 15 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

19                           [The witness takes the stand]

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Before we carry on, Mr. Weber, how much more time

21     do you think you will need?

22             MR. WEBER:  I'm going to approximate an hour.  I'm trying to keep

23     the witness focused on his answers but they've gone a little long.  So I

24     do have some material to go through, but I will finish by the end of the

25     day.

Page 33949

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  So we're not likely to finish this afternoon?

 2             MR. WEBER:  I don't know if there's redirect.

 3             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Well, if you're going for an hour, it will be an

 4     hour by the time we finish.

 5             MR. WEBER:  I'm going to try to finish today.

 6             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Any re-examination, Mr. Ivetic, at this stage?

 7             MR. IVETIC:  Right now only a few questions, two or three

 8     questions.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.

10             You may proceed.

11             MR. WEBER:  Thank you, Your Honours.

12        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, during these proceedings in this case - and what

13     I'm going to be referring to can be found at transcript page 20096,

14     lines 23 to 25 - the Defence claimed that Mr. Herenda was kidnapped and

15     tortured by his colleagues.  The Prosecution does not dispute the fact

16     that you and two of your colleagues took Mr. Herenda and tortured him.

17     That is what happened, you and your colleagues tortured Herenda while he

18     was in your custody; correct?

19        A.   This is not correct.  We treated Herenda in keeping with our

20     authorities.  Later, in the reprocess it was construed that we had

21     tortured Herenda in order to gain financial gain, i.e., 500 German marks,

22     a Zippo lighter, and a silver necklace.  That was the financial gain we

23     were supposed to gain from allegedly kidnapping him.

24        Q.   Herenda sustained severe injuries during his time with you;

25     right?

Page 33950

 1        A.   Nedzad Herenda sustained injuries during his flight attempt.  In

 2     the re-trial, the colleague who was with me who prevented that escape

 3     confirmed that he did not sustain any injuries from torture.  His leg was

 4     injured when he tried to snatch a gun and use it in his flight attempt.

 5        Q.   That was it?

 6        A.   That was it.

 7        Q.   Herenda, in fact, was shot and beaten while he was in your

 8     custody; right?

 9        A.   Herenda was not beaten; however, when he was fighting for the gun

10     or the pistol, the pistol fired and wounded him in the leg.  As he was

11     trying to escape, he sustained a head blow.  Later on, this was construed

12     as an attempt to shoot into his head.

13             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 31918 for

14     the witness.

15        Q.   Coming up before you are excerpts from the 13 June 1997 judgement

16     of the Sarajevo Cantonal Court against you, Haris Pezo, and Refik Muran.

17     I would just like to go through some of the evidence that was presented

18     during your original trial.

19             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have page 8 of the B/C/S

20     original and page 7 of the English translation.

21        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, I'd like to direct your attention to the lower

22     middle of the page where it discusses the material that was available to

23     the medical expert in the trial.  According to the judgement, this

24     material included Herenda's medical records from the Kosevo Hospital, the

25     emergency medical centre in Sarajevo; a neurologist's report; x-rays of

Page 33951

 1     Herenda's leg and head; and a CT scan.

 2             Then if I could direct you toward the bottom of the page where it

 3     states:

 4             "On the basis of the available medical documentation" --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Please slow down.  Thank you.

 6             MR. WEBER:

 7        Q.   "... Expert Witness Dobraca ultimately reported that several

 8     injuries were in evidence on the injured party's body, some of which were

 9     minor and others serious.  He noted there were two areas of soft tissue

10     damage in the parietal-occipital region of the head consisting of two

11     wounds limited to the soft tissue of the scalp which are therefore minor

12     injuries.  However, the CT scan and the testimony of

13     Witness Sulejmanpasic indicated that one of these injuries also included

14     the fracturing of the parietal and occipital bonds on the right side and

15     the injury qualified by Expert Witness Dobraca is a serious bodily

16     injury.  Interpretation of the CT scan showed that one of several

17     features of the injured party's two head wounds included a skull

18     fracture.  Having been informed of the results of the analysis of the

19     ballistics expert, that metal debris found in the skin of the injured

20     party's scalp were parts of bullet rounds."

21             Sir, the truth is that Herenda sustained serious injuries to the

22     head during the interview as a result of a gun-shot; right?

23        A.   Not correct.  You're quoting from the judgement which resulted

24     from the rigged proceedings in the year 2002, when we decided to remain

25     silent and when the corrupted panel tried to hush up the role of

Page 33952

 1     Herenda --

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Witness --

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- and the crimes that he had

 4     committed --

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Witness, let me stop you.  Whether the

 6     judgement was rigged or not, that is immaterial.  That is what is written

 7     in the judgement; is that correct?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes --

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much --

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- that was part of the

11     judgement --

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.  That was the question.

13             MR. WEBER:

14        Q.   On page 2 of this decision, which is also on the bottom of page 2

15     in the B/C/S, the court found that the injuries suffered by Herenda

16     included the serious bodily harm of fracture of the temporal and

17     occipital bones, a number of less serious bodily injuries, consisting of

18     haematomas, and scratches on the skin of the face, arms, the chest below

19     the right breast, front side of the abdomen, left side of the chest, and

20     left lower leg.

21             The truth is Herenda was beaten and shot during your

22     three-day-long interview and sustained multiple injuries to different

23     areas of his body; right?

24        A.   This is based on the report of expert Dobraca who himself was a

25     Seve member.  You can find that in previous documents and statements.

Page 33953

 1     This is not correct because we treated Herenda --

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I'm going to stop you, sir.  You keep criticising

 3     and commenting on the quality of the evidence given.  That's not the

 4     question.  The question is that what is being read to you is what is in

 5     that judgement.  Now, whether Dobraca was part of the Seve or not is not

 6     the question.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, actually, the question by the

 8     Prosecution was not as Your Honour had said.  He's actually asking the

 9     question that the witness is answering, so I would take exception to that

10     characterisation.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.  In that event, then you may carry on,

12     Mr. Weber.

13             MR. WEBER:  At this time the Prosecution tenders 65 ter 31918

14     into evidence.  It's excerpts from the judgement.  We've reduced the size

15     of it to the relevant parts.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  31918 is admitted into evidence.  May it please be

17     given an exhibit number.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P7280, Your Honours.

19             MR. WEBER:

20        Q.   Sir, I'd like to change topics with you and discuss your evidence

21     related to the death of Sefer Halilovic's wife.  First I'd like to look

22     at your previous testimony regarding this event.

23             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have D980, page 17.

24     Okay.  If we could scroll down just towards the middle of the page.

25        Q.   This is another part of your testimony in the Karadzic case.

Page 33954

 1     During this examination you were asked:

 2             "And how was this presented to General Halilovic, and what was

 3     the public told?  What was the official position on this matter?"

 4             You answered:

 5             "The public was told that this was a shell launched by the

 6     Serbian Army, or the Army of Republika Srpska, that it was a guided

 7     projectile of the Maljutka type, as far as I can recall from Herenda's

 8     statement, because he and the other perpetrators left a Maljutka wire,

 9     which is a characteristic of that particular projectile.  They left that

10     behind in order to create the impression that this was a Maljutka

11     launched from Serb positions."

12             You describe a projectile, a Maljutka.  This is a type of

13     rocket-propelled anti-tank missile; correct?

14        A.   I'm not a ballistics expert.  I suppose so, yes.

15        Q.   The closest Serbian position to the north of the Halilovic

16     residence was several kilometres away from their place; right?

17        A.   I believe that it was not so much away because the closest

18     position near the Jezero hospital were about 1 kilometre as the crow

19     flies and Halilovic's apartment was in the part of the city known as

20     Ciglane, brickworks.

21        Q.   Do you know that Maljutkas have a firing range of up to

22     2800 metres, which in this instance would make it a weapon that would not

23     likely have come from Serb positions?  Are you aware of this?

24             MR. IVETIC:  I object to the question as it mixes up the evidence

25     based upon the distances that we've just discussed.

Page 33955

 1             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I think it's a perfectly phrased

 2     question.

 3             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I'm not -- I don't understand that basis,

 4     Mr. Ivetic.  Because it mixes up the evidence upon the distances that

 5     we've just discussed.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  We've been talking about kilometres and now we're

 7     talking about 2800 metres according to the transcript.  So to say that

 8     it's beyond the range of the weapon is not accurate, where we've just had

 9     the evidence that 1 kilometre, which would be 1.000 metres in my

10     understanding, so it would be within the range of the weapon.  So to

11     state that the fact that the rocket has a range of 2800 metres eliminates

12     it from being a potential used -- it misstates the evidence we've just

13     heard.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  But the position of the Prosecution is that it was

15     3 kilometres away which would make it 3.000 metres.

16             MR. IVETIC:  Then he should phrase the question that way,

17     Your Honour.  That's not the question that he asked.

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. --

19             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I think I put the question fine to the

20     witness.  It is our position what I asked, so I would like to hear his

21     answer on the question.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Ivetic would like you to state based on your

23     position not based on -- his says it was a mile away, you say it was

24     3 miles away.

25             MR. WEBER:

Page 33956

 1        Q.   Sir, our position is that the Maljutkas have a firing range of up

 2     to 2800 metres, and based on the actual distance between where the

 3     residence was and the closest Serb positions that it would have unlikely

 4     come from the Serb side; right?  Are you aware of this?

 5        A.   I believe that there is some confusion here.  Herenda admitted

 6     that an explosive was planted and that it killed General Halilovic's wife

 7     and brother, and then it was made believe that it was Maljutka.  A wire

 8     was left there just to make believe that it was Maljutka.  But what

 9     happened was that they planted explosives which they activated from the

10     building across the road.  When they realised that Halilovic's wife and

11     her brother came out on to the balcony, at that moment when they saw

12     them, they actually thought that Mrs. Halilovic's brother was

13     Mr. Halilovic himself.  That's when they activated the explosive.

14        Q.   You really didn't answer my question, but I'm going to move

15     along.  I appreciate that you're not a ballistics expert, but do you

16     realise that a Maljutka is a different type of projectile than an

17     artillery shell fired from a howitzer?

18        A.   I'm telling you again, I'm not an expert in ballistics, but I

19     know it was mentioned that an explosive device was set up.  There was no

20     talk about a projectile or any other detail.

21        Q.   So that's the extent of your knowledge; is that what you're

22     saying?  That just a statement was made to you and that's it?

23        A.   That's correct.

24        Q.   Then it's correct that you did not check any fire tables or

25     conduct any ballistics measurements which may or may not indicate an

Page 33957

 1     artillery shell from a 122-millimetre howitzer impacted the balcony area?

 2     You're not aware of any of that?

 3        A.   That's right, because we were arrested immediately after the

 4     interview with Herenda --

 5        Q.   Sir, you've answered --

 6        A.   -- and we had no authority.  It was not in our purview to do

 7     that.

 8        Q.   Sir, I'm going to try and finish with you today.  If you could

 9     please just focus on my questions.  The explosion that killed

10     General Halilovic's wife and associate occurred on 7 July 1993.  Were you

11     aware of that?

12        A.   I know that.

13        Q.   In your previous testimony, you claim that Herenda told you he

14     planted an explosive to eliminate General Halilovic because, a couple

15     months beforehand, General Halilovic had been removed from his authority

16     over the ABiH and Herenda understood him to be an enemy of the state, at

17     least according to what Herenda told you.  Are you aware that

18     Alija Izetbegovic relieved Sefer Halilovic of his duties as Chief of the

19     Main Staff of the ABiH on 1 November 1993, after the death of his wife?

20        A.   I don't know that, but Herenda said that he had received an

21     assignment from Ugljen to eliminate Halilovic by setting up an explosive

22     device on his balcony.

23             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 32369 for

24     the witness.

25        Q.   This is the 16 April 1999 decision of the Sarajevo cantonal

Page 33958

 1     prosecutor's office which dismissed the criminal complaint of

 2     Sefer Halilovic related to the event that we've been discussing on

 3     7 July 1993.

 4             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have page 2 of both

 5     versions.

 6        Q.   In the top paragraph before you, which is the second paragraph in

 7     the statement of reasons section, the decision indicates that the support

 8     for the allegations was based on a hearing and an interview with you.

 9     There is then a number of articles listed from "Slobodna Bosna" and

10     "Dani" from September and October 1998.

11             These articles contained interviews or statements from you;

12     correct?  These were the newspapers that you provided interviews to in

13     September and October of 1998; correct?

14        A.   No, these journalists received my statements that I had forwarded

15     to the Human Rights Chamber and then they published it, I don't know

16     through which channels.  I see this document for the first time.  And I

17     see that it was issued by the cantonal prosecution office that rigged my

18     trial in 1998.

19        Q.   Okay.

20             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have page 3 of the

21     English translation.

22        Q.   At the end of the next paragraph, the decision states that the

23     official reports of the forensic commission and of the experts for

24     ballistics from 7 July, the date of the incident, 20 and 31 July 1993,

25     claimed beyond any doubt that the individuals at the residence were

Page 33959

 1     killed by an artillery projectile which came from the direction of the

 2     enemy positions from Vogosca.

 3             This is in fact what happened.  The artillery -- there was an

 4     artillery projectile fired from Vogosca and that's why these charges were

 5     dismissed; right?

 6        A.   I stress again, I am seeing this document for the first time, and

 7     as far as I know, right now there is a re-trial going on in

 8     Bosnia-Herzegovina trying to establish whether things happened the way I

 9     described it or it was a shell from enemy positions.

10             MR. WEBER:  The Prosecution tendered this document into evidence,

11     65 ter 32369.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P7281, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

15             MR. WEBER:

16        Q.   I would like now to discuss with you the shooting of the French

17     member of UNPROFOR.  In your past testimony, you commented upon the

18     document that indicated this event occurred on the 15th of April, 1995.

19     This document was admitted with your testimony.

20             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have Exhibit P3, e-court

21     page 25 for the witness.

22        Q.   I would like to go through some of the things that you've said

23     about this event.

24             MR. WEBER:  And if we could please have the photograph on the

25     right-hand side.  Great.  And if we could just slide down a little bit

Page 33960

 1     and zoom-out one time, please.  So if we could have the yellow building,

 2     the Holiday Inn, and the buildings on the lower side of the river

 3     visible, that would be great.  Perfect.  Thank you so much.

 4        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, you recognise the area depicted in the photograph;

 5     right?

 6        A.   I recognise this.

 7             MR. WEBER:  If the court usher could please assist the

 8     Prosecution with -- or the witness with a pen to mark on the photograph.

 9        Q.   At transcript page 33388 of your Karadzic testimony, you

10     indicated that Herenda supposedly told you he fired from the

11     Executive Council building.  Could you please mark the location of this

12     building with the letter E.

13        A.   It's not true, nor did we specify exactly where it came from, but

14     I suppose it's this large building here.  He didn't say exactly.  Now it

15     houses the Executive Council of ministers and the Parliament building,

16     but he didn't tell us the exact position in his statement, nor did we ask

17     him for the exact position.  But the very fact that he shot an

18     international observer astounded us, so we didn't look into the details.

19        Q.   The Executive Council building was located in the area under

20     control of the ABiH army throughout the war; right?

21        A.   Right.  This is the separation line, that's the river --

22        Q.   Sir, if you can hold off making any markings on the document.  I

23     see that you've made a horizontal line where the river is to denote where

24     the separation line was.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And could that line be please deleted.

Page 33961

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.  [Marks]

 2             MR. WEBER:

 3        Q.   I see you've marked with a circle the general area where you

 4     believe Herenda told you he was at.  In your 2000 interview with the OTP,

 5     you indicated that the French soldier was hit across the way or opposite

 6     the Holiday Inn on a crossroads where there is a museum.  Is this right?

 7        A.   Yes, that's right.

 8        Q.   Could you please mark the approximate location where the French

 9     soldier was hit with the number 1.

10        A.   Well, now I don't know exactly which location it is, whether it's

11     this intersection or this one.  There is an intersection here and there's

12     the second one here, and this is the hotel, Holiday Inn.  So these two

13     intersections are on the two sides of Holiday Inn.  But I'm telling you

14     we did not ask for the exact position.

15        Q.   Sir, and I can show this to you if you want, you indicated

16     previously that that occurred across the way or opposite the Holiday Inn

17     on a crossroads where there is a museum.  Do you remember saying this?

18     That would be -- what you previously said, that would be where location

19     number 2 is at; correct?

20        A.   If I may mark, this is the museum and this is Holiday Inn, so

21     both intersections are across the street from Holiday Inn.  I can't tell

22     you which of the two it is because I'm telling you at that time we didn't

23     look for the details.  We just dealt with the fact that he committed this

24     murder.

25        Q.   Now, is it right that Herenda supposedly told you that he climbed

Page 33962

 1     up to one of the upper floors of the Executive Council building to fire

 2     from?

 3        A.   I can't tell you with any certainty from which position he fired.

 4     I only know that he mentioned the building of these two joint

 5     institutions, the Executive Council and the Parliament.  One building is

 6     lower than the other, six floors versus 15.

 7             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, could I have one moment, please.

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You may.

 9                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

10             MR. WEBER:

11        Q.   Sir, Mr. Herenda didn't tell you that the Executive Council

12     building where he was at or that area was fired upon after the UNPROFOR

13     soldier was shot; correct?

14        A.   I can't remember exactly whether he was exposed to fire.

15             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, just so we have a complete record, the

16     witness marked with an H the location of the Holiday Inn and an M the

17     location of the museum.  With that, the Prosecution would tender this

18     document as marked.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  The document as marked is admitted into evidence.

20     May it please be given an exhibit number, Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P7282, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

23             MR. WEBER:  And with that, Your Honours, I have no further

24     questions for the witness.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much, Mr. Weber.

Page 33963

 1             Mr. Ivetic, any re-examination?

 2             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, Your Honours, it will be brief.

 3             If we could first turn to the prior testimony, D980, page 23 in

 4     e-court.

 5                           Re-examination by Mr. Ivetic:

 6        Q.   While we wait for that, a Dr. Dobraca was mentioned by the

 7     Prosecution in relation to the testimony as to Mr. Herenda's alleged

 8     injuries and you indicated that a doctor -- that that was the doctor who

 9     had been part of the Seve.  If we can wait for the part of the transcript

10     that we're waiting for --

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Ivetic, while we're waiting for it, can I

12     interrupt you a little bit?

13             MR. IVETIC:  Sure.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I've just been made aware of the fact that P7281

15     was not properly admitted.  It is hereby admitted into evidence.  Thank

16     you.

17             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

18        Q.   Sir, in this part of your testimony in the Karadzic case you're

19     talking about a pathologist, Ilijas Dobraca, whose job was to provide

20     medical certificates after certain assassinations to cover them up.  Is

21     this the same Dr. Dobraca that provided the medical information

22     purporting to show Mr. Herenda's injuries resulting from the interview?

23        A.   That's correct.  There was only one doctor named Ilija Dobraca.

24        Q.   Now, sir, in answer to the Prosecution's question where they

25     said:  Isn't it true that Herenda was beaten and shot during the

Page 33964

 1     three-day interview with multiple injuries as confirmed by Dr. Dobraca,

 2     you were not allowed to answer the question fully.  I would like to give

 3     you the opportunity to complete your answer as to the Prosecution's

 4     assertion that Mr. Herenda was beaten and shot during the three-day

 5     interview with multiple injuries therefrom.

 6        A.   The very order we received said it was a dangerous armed

 7     criminal, and when he was bound and handcuffed, certainly it left traces

 8     on his arms.  During the arrest and his treatment, we followed the law

 9     governing the agency and it's not true what the trumped-up indictment

10     said.  But during his attempt to escape, Herenda took advantage of a

11     moment of inattention by Haris who was guarding him, tried to seize his

12     weapon, and it resulted in him being injured in the leg.  After that, we

13     turned him over to Mr. Fikret Masic, who was to treat his injury.  But

14     even before that, we bandaged his leg and thus provided him with

15     emergency medical assistance before turning him over to the doctor.

16             MR. IVETIC:  And I'd like to now look at P7279, which was also

17     used during the cross-examination, and to start off I'd like to look at

18     page 3 of the same.

19        Q.   This will be the 2002 decision on admissibility and merits of the

20     Human Rights Chamber for Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I'd like to look at

21     paragraph 17 of the same, which states:

22             "On 5 October 2000, the applicant also challenged Judge Malik

23     Hadziomeragic on the grounds of partiality due to the allegation that he

24     was in contact with the secret service AID (Agencija za istrazvanje i

25     dokumentaciju).  The applicant explained before the Supreme Court panel

Page 33965

 1     that persons from the AID told him during the first set of the

 2     proceedings that the dispute would be solved positively due to the

 3     collaboration of the mentioned judge with the AID.  He complained that,

 4     contrary to the promise, the result was not positive.  On the same day,

 5     5 October 2000, the president of the Supreme Court decided to reject the

 6     applicant's challenge propter affectum as ill-founded due to the lack of

 7     evidence in support of the motion and on any other indication of

 8     partiality."

 9             And now that the translation is finished, the question I have for

10     you, sir, is:  First of all, does this accurately describe the fact that

11     the Chamber decided the same day as you gave them all this information to

12     dismiss the allegation of partiality on the part of the stated judge,

13     Hadziomeragic?

14        A.   As far as I know.

15        Q.   And in relation to your complaints about the judge, did another

16     organisation also present a report about the same in support of your

17     appeal?

18        A.   Yes, Amnesty International cited my trial as an example of a

19     rigged trial and an example of a violation of human rights.  They

20     actively followed it all the time, from 1998, when I first appealed to

21     the Human Rights Chamber.

22             MR. IVETIC:  For Your Honours' reference, on the next page,

23     paragraph 22 discusses Amnesty International's position.  Since this has

24     been entered into evidence, we don't need to have that read.

25             I'd like to now turn to page 14 of this exhibit, and I'd like to

Page 33966

 1     focus on section 2.2.  And the bottom of this page is signed

 2     Giovanni Grasso, and in 2.2, it says as follows:

 3             "In the present case the fear of the applicant as to the

 4     impartiality of the Court appears to be fully reasonable and justified

 5     because not only some but all the judges who decided upon the renewed

 6     appeal had already decided upon the previous appeal, taking a clear

 7     position on his criminal responsibility after an evaluation of all the

 8     circumstances of the case.  The subject matter of the renewed appeal

 9     proceedings and of the original proceedings was exactly the same, so that

10     the impartiality of the judges who had already taken a decision on the

11     case is clearly open to doubts."

12             At temporary transcript page 52, lines 20 to 24, you indicated a

13     dissent of Mr. Grasso.  Is this the dissent that you're talking about?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And for purposes of the record, could you please tell us who

16     Mr. Grasso was, what position he held?

17        A.   Mr. Grasso presided over the Human Rights Chamber in the first

18     proceedings, otherwise he is an Italian judge as far as I know.  There

19     were a total of six international judges from different countries.

20        Q.   Mr. Garaplija, thank you for answering my questions and for your

21     time today.

22             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, that completes my redirect.

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you, Mr. Ivetic.

24             Nothing arising, Mr. Weber?

25             MR. WEBER:  No, Your Honours.

Page 33967

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.

 2             Mr. Garaplija, that concludes your testimony before the Tribunal.

 3     I want to thank you very much for coming all the way to come and answer

 4     the questions, and we wish you a safe return back home.  You may follow

 5     the usher.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 7                           [The witness withdrew]

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Is the Defence ready to call the next witness?

 9             MR. LUKIC:  No, we are not, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You're not.  Thank you very much.

11             MR. LUKIC:  We had -- probably you were informed that we had some

12     technical problems with this witness --

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  We just wanted to have it on the record that we

14     don't have one.  Thank you so much.

15             In that event, we will stand adjourned, and we will reconvene

16     tomorrow morning at 9.30 in the morning in the same courtroom, I.  Court

17     adjourned.

18                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.03 p.m.,

19                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 1st day of

20                           April, 2015, at 9.30 a.m.