Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 37549

 1                           Tuesday, 11 August 2015

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

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

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

 6     courtroom.

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

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

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

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             Could the witness be escorted in the courtroom.

12                           [The witness takes the stand]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Gojkovic.  Please be seated.

14             Mr. Gojkovic, before we continue I'd like to remind you that

15     you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the

16     beginning of your testimony that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth,

17     and nothing but the truth.

18             Mr. Lukic will now continue his examination-in-chief.

19                           WITNESS:  DRAGIC GOJKOVIC [Resumed]

20                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

21                           Examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]

22        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Gojkovic.

23        A.   Good morning.

24        Q.   I do apologise, I just need to take a look at today's transcript.

25             Yesterday at the end of the day, we started discussing

Page 37550

 1     documentation from the police that had to do with the demolition of

 2     Ferhadija.  I should show you a document first, 1D5770.  Those are

 3     instructions of the Trial Chamber.

 4             For the record, let us point out that this document was mentioned

 5     in your report:  B/C/S pages 65 to 88, and in the English version, pages

 6     74 through 94.  Have you seen this criminal file from the Security

 7     Services Centre in Banja Luka?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   What can you tell us?  Would you like to draw our attention to

10     something in relation to this document?  What kind of information did you

11     manage to find?  What kind of information did you not manage to find?

12        A.   We were looking for this case for a long, long time.  Finally, I

13     managed to get it from the public security centre in Banja Luka.  When I

14     took the file, I really read through it, all the witness statements.  In

15     addition to the record and the witness statements, there was nothing

16     there.  I found nothing, literally.  I was there, I heard that, I didn't

17     see anybody, and so on and so forth.  That surprised me.

18             Within the file, I did not find a single photograph from the

19     on-site investigation that was carried out by the investigation judge of

20     the basic court in Banja Luka, although in the record itself it says that

21     the scene, the site, was fully photo-documented.  I looked at that.  I

22     did not find anything in that file, so all the photographs that I took, I

23     took from the Internet.

24        Q.   So what were you told?  How did the photographs disappear?

25        A.   I was told that all the documents were taken by the Office of the

Page 37551

 1     Prosecutor of The Hague Tribunal and that they have no other documents

 2     except for the ones that they gave me.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We would like to tender this document

 5     into evidence.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  No objections.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Shall be assigned Exhibit D1179.  Thank you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, let's ...

10                           [Trial Chamber confers]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Page numbers, you mentioned, Mr. Lukic, were the

12     hard copy page numbers from the report in the attachment to the report,

13     and you now separately --

14             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  D1179 is admitted into evidence.

16             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  May I put one question with respect to this file.

17             Mr. Gojkovic, you said:

18             "Finally I managed to get it from the public security centre in

19     Banja Luka."

20             When was that?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.  I can find that.

22     I'll tell you right now.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Approximately.  Are you now looking at your

24     report?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's around the 28th of August,

Page 37552

 1     Jovica Roguljic gave this to me, head of department in Banja Luka.

 2     Although the -- he had this from the Ministry of Justice and then they

 3     returned it to them, and then the centre to me, and I signed for it.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  You said 28th of August.  Which year?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 2014.  Then --

 6             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- what you've got here is that on

 8     the 1st of September, 2014, again I went to see Jovica Roguljic.  I don't

 9     know exactly when he gave this to me, but --

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  No, I'm fine.  You have answered my question.

11     Thank you very much.

12             Mr. Lukic.

13             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  You can find it in the report.

14     There are cover letters, page 72, 71 --

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I just wanted to have the date on the record.

16     Thank you.

17             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

18             Can we have 1D5771 now on our screens, please.

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Can you recognise this document, Mr. Gojkovic?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   What is this document about?

22        A.   The destruction of the Petricevac monastery.  No, no, no, sorry.

23     No.  Yes, of Saint Ante.

24        Q.   Did you obtain this documentation?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 37553

 1        Q.   From who and when?

 2        A.   In the same way as I did for the Ferhadija, and at the same time

 3     and from the same man.

 4        Q.   What was the situation regarding the information that was

 5     contained in this document?  What did you find and what did you not find?

 6        A.   Approximately the same.  Although here, I mean, the witnesses

 7     here spoke more about the destruction of the buildings around this place

 8     and how the glass panes were shattered.  The public security station of

 9     Budzak was involved here.  They carried out the on-site investigation.

10     That is what is written in these statements.

11        Q.   What about photographs?

12        A.   No photographs again.  And also the statement in the MUP that the

13     rest of the file was taken over by The Hague OTP.  I photocopied

14     everything that I found in the file and I submitted it to you.

15             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Just for the record, in the report of

16     Mr. Gojkovic, this is on pages 89 through 104 in B/C/S, and in the

17     English version pages 95 through 110, and we would like to tender this

18     document into evidence.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  Shall be assigned Exhibit D1180.  Thank you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  D1180 is admitted.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Thank you Mr. Gojkovic.  Now we're just going to take a look at

24     two more documents and then we'll be done with that.

25             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] First we need 65 ter 16559.  That's a

Page 37554

 1     Prosecution document.

 2        Q.   First, I'm going to ask you whether you recognise this document.

 3        A.   I do recognise it.

 4        Q.   What can you tell us about the document?

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note: Could the witness please

 6     speak into the microphone.  Could all other microphones be switched off.

 7     And --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, you're invited to speak into the

 9     microphone, or perhaps the microphone can be slightly adjusted.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, it's all right.  It's all

11     right.

12             I received this document in Nova Topola near Gradiska where my

13     command post was, where I was commander at the time.  At that time, I did

14     not know about any problems concerning the destruction of religious

15     buildings.  At that time in that area where I was based, there was no

16     destruction of religious buildings.  I called the command in.  We had a

17     meeting.  We analysed this.  I gave certain instructions, and that's

18     that.

19             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Do you recognise the signature at the end of the document?

21        A.   Of course I do.

22        Q.   Whose signature is it?

23        A.   General Talic's.

24        Q.   Let us look at a document that comes after this one.  So this one

25     is dated the 23rd of June, 1992.  Now let us take a look at 65 ter,

Page 37555

 1     Prosecution number, 16556.  The document is dated the 3rd of August,

 2     1992.

 3             Again, it says repeated warning against demolition of places of

 4     worship.  It is type-signed:  General -- Major-General Momir Talic --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We didn't hear the rest of

 6     Mr. Lukic' question.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, this is different.  This is --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, you started an answer before Mr. Lukic had

 9     finished his question.

10             Mr. Lukic, could we restart.  Could you --

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- repeat your question and then we'll hear the

13     answer.

14             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Do you recognise the signature on this document?

16        A.   I do.  I recognise it.

17        Q.   Whose signature is that?

18        A.   It was the signature of the then-assistant for morale, religious,

19     and legal affairs, Milutin Vukelic.  He signed it on behalf of

20     General Talic.

21        Q.   And do you remember if you received this document?

22        A.   All of us received these documents as unit commanders.

23        Q.   And did you inform the command cadre of your unit?

24        A.   Absolutely.

25        Q.   We didn't look at the second page in the first document, but

Page 37556

 1     let's look at the second page of this one.  It says:  "Distribution."

 2        A.   Yes.  The 1st Engineers Regiment, the 1st Pontoon Battalion in

 3     the first, third, sixth, and seventh place.

 4        Q.   Very well.  And was this acted upon, as far as you know, because

 5     in the document all the unit commanders are warned to prevent

 6     irresponsible acts, i.e., the destruction of religious buildings?

 7        A.   What I noticed in reporting to General Talic who held meetings

 8     with the unit commanders, and it is also my opinion that he was a person

 9     of authority, I don't know a commanding officer of any of these units who

10     would violate his order.  Perhaps there were such instances, but if they

11     this read it, that would not have been very likely.

12             MR. LUKIC:  We would offer those two documents into evidence,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could we first go back to the first page of

15     this document, because I would have an additional question.

16             Mr. Gojkovic, a reference is made to instances of demolition of

17     places of worship that were still witnessed.  Could you tell us whether

18     you have any knowledge about what was observed?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know - I wasn't there -

20     the first buildings that were destroyed were in the area of the Prijedor

21     municipality.  And then later when combat started, there were these

22     stories in Kotor Varos.  I was on good terms with Colonel Kosanovic, the

23     commander of the regiment, who I replaced.  And even one thing, I think

24     Commander Milutin Vukelic and Hasanovic came to me at the end of June,

25     and they wrote the draft of that order while they were with me in the

Page 37557

 1     area of Nova Topola.  They were very disappointed and they were trying to

 2     find a way of resolving this situation, and I think that all of these

 3     orders were initiated by Colonel --

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not hear the name.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- and he came with me -- to me

 6     with Kosanovic because they thought that the engineers --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you repeat the name of the colonel you

 8     referred to.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Colonel Milutin Vukelic and Colonel

10     Lazar Kosanovic.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Then could I invite you to finish your sentence when

12     you started saying that "because they thought that the engineers ...,"

13     and what did you say then?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely.  They first came to us

15     because at that time no one, no one had that much reserve explosives as

16     we did, and they came to see us so -- to check whether any of us would

17     dare to do something like that.  They came to see me and I said that my

18     entire explosive reserves were at the central depot.  I didn't even need

19     it.  Throughout the whole war, I didn't need any of the explosives.  And

20     I'm sorry because I couldn't find all this data in the archives to be

21     able to show it.

22             At my command post, they drafted this order, not this one but I

23     think there's another one.  I think I can find it here somewhere.  Let me

24     see where I put it.  I do remember it very well.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  But could I ask you then -- or did I understand you

Page 37558

 1     well that you have no specific knowledge about the instances that

 2     apparently triggered this order to be issued?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not at the time, I didn't have

 6     any knowledge, no.

 7             MR. LUKIC:  I would just offer those two documents into evidence,

 8     Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             Mr. Registrar.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter document 16559 shall be assigned

12     Exhibit D1181.

13             And the other one, 65 ter number 16556 shall be assigned

14     Exhibit D1182.  Thank you.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  D1181 and D1182 are admitted into evidence.

16             MR. LUKIC:  And, Your Honour, I would just offer the report to be

17     MFI'd.

18             MR. TRALDI:  No objection to it being MFI'd.

19             MR. LUKIC:  And then we'll probably discuss with the Prosecution

20     which parts should be excluded since those documents were admitted

21     separately and they are a part of it.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And we'll hear from you later exactly what is

23     still there to be tendered as annexes we have not yet dealt with.

24             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, if you ask the report to be MFI'd, is that a

Page 37559

 1     report including all the annexes or just the report up to where the

 2     annexes start?  Because they are more or less separated from the report

 3     and dealt with separately.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  They are.  But it may be that we will keep some

 5     annexes and we have to discuss it with the Prosecution.  So maybe --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  We'll then MFI the report and we'll later

 7     determine what is still attached and what is not attached any further.

 8             Mr. Traldi.

 9             MR. TRALDI:  And just for the clarity of the record, what I

10     understand Mr. Lukic to be asking to be marked for identification is what

11     is currently uploaded as 1D05892, which currently includes both the

12     report and the attachments --

13             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

14             MR. TRALDI:  -- pending discussions.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  That's how it is now.  And whether that will change,

16     we'll see that later.  So more or less it's more -- it's reserving a

17     number for the report, still to be determined what is part of it and what

18     is not.

19             Mr. Registrar.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  It shall be assigned Exhibit D1183.  Thank you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  D1183 is marked for identification.

22             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

23        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Gojkovic, these were all the questions we

24     had for you, and we thank you for answering our questions.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Gojkovic, you'll now be cross-examined by

Page 37560

 1     Mr. Traldi.  You find Mr. Traldi to your right.  Mr. Traldi is counsel

 2     for the Prosecution.

 3             Mr. Traldi, please proceed.

 4             MR. TRALDI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 5                           Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi:

 6        Q.   Good morning, sir.

 7        A.   Good morning.

 8        Q.   Sir, this morning, Mr. Lukic showed you a couple of police files

 9     into the destruction of the Ferhadija mosque and the Petricevac church.

10     Did you review those files in the course of preparing your report?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  You apparently are nodding.  Could you please

12     clearly state your answer to that question so that it's on the record.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did.

14             MR. TRALDI:

15        Q.   Do either of those files reflect anyone being punished for

16     destroying the mosques; that is, convicted and sentenced to a term of

17     years in prison by the war-time Bosnian Serb authorities?

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please be asked to speak into

19     the microphone.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, again you're invited to speak into the

21     microphone, if need be, to adjust it, so that your words will not be

22     lost.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise.

24             As far as I can see, the case is still in the court.  The

25     documents that I found in the case file do not allow me to conclude

Page 37561

 1     whether somebody was convicted or not because the case has not been

 2     completed.  No judgement either at first instance or second instance has

 3     been handed down yet.

 4             MR. TRALDI:

 5        Q.   And Mr. Lukic also showed you an order this morning where General

 6     Talic said, among other things, that if anyone in the 1st Krajina Corps

 7     destroyed a mosque it could be considered a criminal act and measures

 8     would be taken.  You're not aware of any soldier in the 1st Krajina Corps

 9     being convicted and sentenced in the Banja Luka military court for

10     destroying a mosque or a Catholic church, are you?

11        A.   That's correct.  But during the war in the B and H, there was the

12     military court of the Army of Republika Srpska.  I could not have access

13     to those cases, so I don't know what those judgements were.  I did not

14     deal with that.  I dealt exclusively with these two buildings.  You also

15     had the military court.  I did ask about documents of the military court,

16     but I could not have access to them.  Those documents were taken away --

17        Q.   Well, sir --

18        A.   -- by the OTP.

19        Q.   Sir, this Chamber has received the register of the Banja Luka

20     military court.  What I'm asking for the moment isn't what you analysed

21     in the course of preparing your report.  You provide a lot of

22     information, both the last two days and in your report, from your

23     personal knowledge.  You're not personally aware of any soldier in the

24     1st Krajina Corps being punished for destroying a mosque or a Catholic

25     church during the war, are you?

Page 37562

 1        A.   Well, I'm saying again:  If there were such reports, they

 2     probably ended up at the military court of the Army of Republika Srpska.

 3        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, let me stop you there.  What Mr. Traldi

 5     asked you, whether you have any knowledge, not whether such information

 6     could possibly be found somewhere, but whether you have any personal

 7     knowledge about prosecutions, convictions, and sentenced soldiers.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

 9             MR. TRALDI:

10        Q.   And you and General Talic both, from your training in the JNA,

11     you knew it was illegal, a violation of the international laws of war, to

12     destroy religious buildings; right?

13        A.   That's correct.

14        Q.   I'm going to ask you some questions about your report.

15             As an initial matter, you note on page 41 of the English and 39

16     of the B/C/S and you discussed yesterday that you and four other people

17     were involved in drafting the report.  Which sections did you draft

18     yourself?

19        A.   Which parts?  Well, other than gathering the data about the

20     engineer units of the VRS, and other than analysing the VOB-8 of both of

21     the units, everything else did myself.

22        Q.   And Attachment P which we discussed briefly and Mr. Lukic showed

23     you yesterday, the entry for Donji Kamengrad Grad, the mosque in Donji

24     Kamengrad that was destroyed, did you also do that section yourself?

25        A.   Regarding the mosque in Kamengrad?  I don't understand.  In what

Page 37563

 1     sense?

 2        Q.   Sure.  Let me rephrase.  Attachment P consists of about 40 to 50

 3     entries for individual mosques, one of which Mr. Lukic showed you

 4     yesterday related to the mosque in Donji Kamengrad Grad.  Did you do that

 5     section of the report yourself?

 6        A.   Absolutely.

 7        Q.   You would have selected which photographs to use yourself?

 8        A.   Out of the 94 mosques that were looked at here, I took the most

 9     characteristic ones that were of most interest to me, but it's a system

10     of destruction without any order at all.  Through those mosques, I could

11     practically show --

12        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

13             MR. LUKIC:  I object.  There is no need for yelling in this

14     courtroom.  This is the third time that my colleague is yelling at the

15     witness.  There is no need for this.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi is invited to use his voice in such a way

17     that the witness will not feel in any way intimidated.

18             And the witness is invited to focus his answer on the question as

19     put to him.

20             Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.

21             MR. TRALDI:

22        Q.   Sir, the photographs in Attachment P, you selected those

23     yourself; yes or no?

24        A.   Yes, that's correct.

25        Q.   And the text in Attachment P, how did you create that?

Page 37564

 1        A.   I'm sorry, can you read it to me?

 2        Q.   Well, there are 40 entries in Attachment P.  40 to 50.  Let's

 3     look at one.  Can we have --

 4        A.   Well, could you just tell me that one that you referred to just

 5     now?

 6        Q.   I'm going to call it up on the screen, sir, and we'll have it

 7     front of you in a minute.

 8             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have 65 ter 1D05892, the tendered report.

 9     And I'm looking for page 149 in the English, 142 in the B/C/S.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Could you give the number again, please.

11             MR. TRALDI:  It's D1183, MFI, now.

12        Q.   Sir, this is your entry on the Carsijska mosque in Srebrenica

13     town; right?

14        A.   You said it was the mosque in Kamengrad in Sanski Most.  Now this

15     is a completely different mosque, the one in Srebrenica.

16        Q.   Yes, sir.  There are a number of examples, some of which I will

17     refer to, some of which I will call up.  This one is your entry, as I put

18     to you a moment ago, on the Carsijska mosque in Srebrenica town; right?

19        A.   That's correct.

20             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Traldi, could you please clarify with the

21     witness why we have in the B/C/S an additional photograph in the middle

22     which doesn't appear in the English version?

23             MR. TRALDI:

24        Q.   Yes, sir, why do we have an additional photograph in the B/C/S

25     that's not in the English?

Page 37565

 1        A.   I know absolutely what you're asking me.  I simply reduced a

 2     number of photographs that were not important to me that didn't show

 3     anything.  I didn't want to conceal anything.  All I wanted to do was to

 4     simplify things using the photographs that I was showing here.  I didn't

 5     do it just in the case of this mosque.  I did it in each of -- with each

 6     of the mosques.  I just wanted to simplify the case that I was working

 7     on.  I didn't wish to conceal anything, and you cannot conceal anything

 8     because you also have that in your own case file.

 9        Q.   We'll see how you simplified it in a moment.  Before we do --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we do so, Witness, could you tell us did you

11     prepare the English version of the report yourself as well?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  How, then, could you simplify matters?  Did you give

14     instructions to someone to leave out photographs or ...

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did that.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  But --

17             MR. TRALDI:  May I try to clarify it, Mr. President.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

19             MR. TRALDI:

20        Q.   Sir, when you say you simplified the photographs, what you mean

21     is this is a subset of the photographs that are used in Mr. Riedlmayer's

22     formatted entry for the same site; right?

23        A.   That's correct.

24        Q.   And as you didn't prepare the English, do you have any knowledge

25     why the photograph in the middle of the page in the B/C/S would be

Page 37566

 1     present in the B/C/S but not in the English?

 2        A.   I assume that the Defence accepted what I did and that's what

 3     they presented.  That's my opinion.  Perhaps I'm wrong.

 4        Q.   No personal knowledge as to why the middle photograph isn't in

 5     the English, right; yes or no?

 6        A.   Could you please repeat your question.

 7        Q.   You have no personal knowledge as to why the middle photograph in

 8     the B/C/S is present in the B/C/S but not in the English, do you?

 9        A.   I am saying again for me to analyse any destroyed building, the

10     photographs that I presented are quite sufficient.

11        Q.   Sir, respectfully --

12        A.   What I showed was quite sufficient.

13        Q.   -- I'm going to stop you.  This is the fourth time I'm asking you

14     the same yes or no question.  There's, in the middle of the page in the

15     B/C/S, a single photograph that Judge Fluegge had originally asked you

16     about -- sorry, I think Judge Fluegge had originally asked you about,

17     that's present in the B/C/S.  It's not present in the English.  You

18     yourself don't know why it's present in one and not the other; right?

19     Yes or no.

20        A.   Again, I'm answering you.  I cannot answer with a "yes" or a

21     "no."  I personally left it out because I didn't need it for my own

22     analysis.  These three photographs were quite sufficient for me to be

23     able to discuss any aspect of the -- this particular building.  It was my

24     opinion, I believe, that you cannot really see anything from this

25     photograph, and it's not necessary in order to analyse the destruction of

Page 37567

 1     this particular building.  These three photographs are quite sufficient

 2     for me to be able to talk about --

 3        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

 4        A.   -- the things --

 5             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Sir --

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- that have to do with the

 7     destruction of this particular building, and that you can prove quite

 8     enough things just on the basis of these three photographs.

 9             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Since I triggered the whole discussion, may I

10     just put one additional question to you, Mr. Gojkovic.

11             Look at the left side of the screen.  There you have the Serbian

12     version of your report.  You find a photograph in the middle.  There are

13     three rows:  A small photograph on top, one in the middle, and two

14     photographs on the bottom of the page.  Why is the photograph in the

15     middle in the Serbian version to be seen?  This is your version, I

16     assume, because you didn't prepare the English one.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, that's correct,

18     that's correct.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  That means you didn't simplify it by taking out

20     the fourth photograph in your version?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just one moment, please.  I wanted

22     to look.  I have it.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Yes, indeed.  That means the photograph is still

24     to be seen in your report.  Have you any idea why this photograph

25     disappeared by translating your report into English?  Have you any idea

Page 37568

 1     about that?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then you have to ask the Defence

 3     about that.  I don't know.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  That -- that is -- thank you.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I sent this --

 6             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I sent this to The Hague.

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.  This is exactly what Mr. Traldi and I

 9     myself wanted to know how that disappeared.

10             Perhaps the Defence should explain that.

11             MR. LUKIC:  We are trying to see who was translating it, whether

12     it was our translator or CLSS.  So if it's our, we will contact him.  If

13     it's CLSS, we have to ask CLSS.

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.  This clarifies the matter.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I still am a bit confused, Witness.  Because,

16     Mr. Gojkovic, you explained to us why three photographs would be enough.

17             Now if you had nothing to do with the translation and if you are

18     saying to us, "Well, ask the Defence," why then did you give such an

19     explanation as to why it would be satisfactory to have only three instead

20     of four if you had nothing to do with the conversion into English?  I'm

21     confused by that.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's just a confusion.  I thought

23     that I left the photograph out in my report.  It's just a bit of

24     confusion, and I apologise.  It's my mistake.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  So you're telling us that you bear no responsibility

Page 37569

 1     and you were not involved in any way in reducing four photographs into

 2     three photographs?

 3             Your answer may not be clear on the record.  Could you please

 4     pronounce it properly.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I simply included all the four

 6     photographs in my report.  I don't know whether the Defence translation

 7     or whoever did it here at the secretariat left out one of those

 8     photographs, but I had nothing to do with that.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, apart from who did it, have you not

10     observed that we have a different English version compared to the B/C/S?

11             MR. LUKIC:  I have to admit, I hadn't.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

13             Please proceed.

14             MR. TRALDI:

15        Q.   Sir, at temporary transcript page 18 today, lines 14 through 17,

16     you said it was your opinion that you couldn't see anything from this

17     photograph in the middle of the page, that it wasn't necessary, and the

18     other three photographs are quite sufficient.

19             Now, you gave that evidence because you weren't focusing on the

20     question.  You were simply trying to justify what you understood to be

21     the reductions in Mr. Riedlmayer's material that you thought you'd made;

22     right?

23        A.   No, no, that's not correct.  On the basis of these three

24     photographs, I can see quite clearly how this mosque -- I mean, not

25     absolutely.  I wasn't there.  I wasn't recording it.  I didn't see it.  I

Page 37570

 1     wasn't there immediately after the explosion, after the demolition.  But

 2     it's quite clear how --

 3        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you one more time --

 4        A.   -- the demolition was carried out.  You can see it on the basis

 5     of these three photographs.

 6        Q.   You again haven't answered my question.  What I'm putting to you

 7     is you testified a moment ago that the photograph you included in the

 8     middle of the page in your version, the B/C/S version, wasn't necessary.

 9     And let me ask you in a very focused way:  Is it your evidence today that

10     you included an unnecessary photograph from which you can't really tell

11     anything on this page?

12        A.   Let me tell you, thank God we have a detailed report of the

13     investigating judge and we have photographs.  I'm talking about the

14     photographs.  I included them because this building was interesting to

15     me, and had there been more photographs I would have included them.  On

16     the basis of the photographs, you can just see --

17        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

18        A.   -- where the mosque was located.  You can see the place where it

19     was.

20        Q.   You agreed a moment ago that this represents your work reducing

21     and you said simplifying Mr. Riedlmayer's formatted entry for the site.

22     So where in your report it refers to this section, this attachment, as

23     consisting of photographs from Kemal Zukic's book, that's not true.  This

24     is material you took directly from Riedlmayer's report; right?

25        A.   That's correct.

Page 37571

 1        Q.   I'm going to look at the description of the damage at the top,

 2     and you said you were responsible for the text yourself.  The description

 3     of the damage begins:

 4             "At the time the author visited the locality (July 2002), the

 5     site of Carsijska Dzamija was empty land in the centre of Srebrenica."

 6             Now, you didn't visit this site in 2002, did you?

 7        A.   I never claimed that.  Where did I say that I was there?

 8        Q.   Well, this is a report you authored.  It says the author visited

 9     the site.  In fact -- and that's not true, the author of your report did

10     not visit this site in July 2002; right?

11        A.   Well, I keep telling that you I took information only from the

12     expert report by Riedlmayer.  I was not there.  I never said any such

13     thing.

14        Q.   So what you've done is published something under your name that

15     says the author did something.  You've not identified in your report that

16     this was Mr. Riedlmayer's material, and you've certainly created the

17     impression with your text that you did things you didn't do; right?

18             MR. LUKIC:  Objection.

19             THE WITNESS:  [No interpretation]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  The question has been answered, but we'd

21     nevertheless would like to know what your objection is.

22             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honour, for us it's clear what Mr. Gojkovic

23     thought under "author."

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, could we --

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  [Overlapping speakers].

Page 37572

 1             MR. LUKIC:  Sorry?

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  What is your objection, sir?  Something may be

 3     clear to you, but that's no basis for an objection.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  It is suggested that Mr. Gojkovic put something in

 5     his report that is not true.

 6             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Sure, but that's not the basis for an objection

 7     still.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Now where -- Witness, Witness --

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My report --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.

11             In this annex to the report or in your report, where do we find a

12     clear explanation that what you copied here is just the comments of

13     Mr. Riedlmayer and not of you as the author of the report?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I now?

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As for Riedlmayer's paper, this is

17     just an addition to my report.  However, I reduced something.  I mean, I

18     paid for all of this.  I did all this on my own.  I had very little time.

19     Quite simply, I tried, I tried -- I mean, look, it was a big case.  I

20     tried to reduce it quite simply.  I never said that it was my paper.

21             Look at this now.  The municipality of Srebrenica, the city

22     mosque.  This paragraph of Riedlmayer's.  It's his, not mine.  I never

23     made any comment.  I just took it at face value.  I just left out things

24     that are not important.  I did not say whether it was a modern mosque or

25     whether it was a Osmanli mosque or whatever.  I wasn't interested in

Page 37573

 1     that.

 2             MR. TRALDI:

 3        Q.   Sir, we're going to look at some of the things you left out after

 4     the break.  I have a couple of quick remaining questions before hand

 5     about this entry.

 6             First, you testified yesterday at transcript page 37543 that in

 7     your view there was "a lot missing from Mr. Riedlmayer's work."  Relative

 8     to the individual sites, you yourself have not added anything that you

 9     thought was missing to his work; right?

10        A.   I only dealt with the way in which buildings were demolished.

11        Q.   Sir --

12        A.   Riedlmayer dealt with spirituality, history, and whatever else.

13        Q.   Let me ask -- sir, I'm going to interrupt you.  Let me ask very

14     clearly:  What is on this page that is not included in Mr. Riedlmayer's

15     entry for the same site?  Point me to one thing that is on this page but

16     not in Mr. Riedlmayer's entry?

17        A.   What's the page?

18        Q.   The page on the screen in front of you.  On the screen.

19        A.   Let me just find it.  Let's find it in Riedlmayer's report, and

20     then we'll see.  It's hard for me to remember all of that, very hard.

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  In your report, it is page 142.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, see?  The Srebrenica

23     municipality, Carsijska Celija, the down-town mosque --

24             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  This is too fast for

25     interpretation.

Page 37574

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, Witness, could you please restart your

 2     answer but slowly so that the interpreters can interpret your words.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, Riedlmayer, Your Honours,

 4     starts his report about the demolition of this mosque in the following

 5     way --

 6             MR. TRALDI:

 7        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.  What I asked you is point me to one

 8     thing that is your entry that is not in Mr. Riedlmayer's.  I didn't ask

 9     you to read out Mr. Riedlmayer's to us.  Point us to one thing that is in

10     your entry on the screen that is not in Mr. Riedlmayer's entry for this

11     site.

12        A.   My report only contains the first paragraph of Mr. Riedlmayer,

13     where he describes the damage.  That is what is of interest to me.

14     Nothing else.  So the description of the damage and the photographs.

15     That is the only thing that is of interest to me.  I'm not interested in

16     any of the rest.

17        Q.   So the answer to my question is there is nothing in your entry

18     that is not in Mr. Riedlmayer's entry, but there are things in his entry

19     that are not in yours; right?

20        A.   That text is irrelevant for me and that's why it's not there.

21     For my report, the only thing that is relevant --

22        Q.   I'm going to stop you.

23        A.   -- is the description of --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, could we -- we'll take a break very soon,

25     Mr. Traldi.

Page 37575

 1             Witness, first of all, in the description of Attachment P you say

 2     that these are photographs taken from Mr. Zukic's book.  If I understand

 3     it well now, it is that photographs -- could you please let me finish.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Kemal Zukic.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please allow me to finish.

 6             First of all, I understand your testimony now to be that the

 7     photographs are not taken from that book but are photographs taken from

 8     Mr. Riedlmayer's report; that's one.  Second, the text to which the brief

 9     description of Attachment P refers is not text you drafted but you say is

10     text you copied from Mr. Riedlmayer's report.  And I think after -- you

11     agree with that?  Could you please say so, whether you agree or not,

12     because otherwise it's lost.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely, yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I think, that's at least my feeling at this moment,

15     that Mr. Traldi, after the break, will focus on whether anything was

16     added or whether anything was left out from Mr. Riedlmayer's text.

17             Mr. Traldi, is that how I have to understand?

18             MR. TRALDI:  That's right, Your Honour.  Although, I had asked a

19     question that I hadn't gotten an answer to.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Then you may put that question again, we'll hear the

21     answer, and then take a break.

22             MR. TRALDI:

23        Q.   Sir, there is not anything on this page that is not - no

24     photograph and no part of the description of the damage - that is not

25     also contained in Mr. Riedlmayer's report; right?

Page 37576

 1        A.   Absolutely.  Riedlmayer dealt with lots of things that were

 2     irrelevant for my report and that is the basic reason why I left that

 3     out.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, what Mr. Traldi asks you is whether

 5     everything we find on this page is also found in Mr. Riedlmayer's report.

 6     That's the only thing Mr. Traldi seeks to establish.  And I think you

 7     answered the question.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

 9             MR. TRALDI:  One follow-up, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but ...

11             MR. TRALDI:

12        Q.   Consequently, sir, there is nothing on this page that reflects

13     your own analysis or opinion of what happened to this site; correct?

14        A.   Well, look.  I can analyse from photographs what it was that

15     happened here.  Everything that Mr. Riedlmayer wrote --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, that's not the question.  The question is

17     whether what we see on this page, that it does not contain any opinion

18     developed by yourself and it is just what you copied from

19     Mr. Riedlmayer's report.  Is that correct or is it not?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's the way it is.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, that was your last question before the

22     break.

23             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, and I appreciate the Chamber's indulgence.

24     Thank you.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take a break, Mr. Gojkovic.  We'd like to see

Page 37577

 1     you back in 20 minutes.  You may follow the usher.

 2                           [The witness stands down]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at 11.00.

 4                           --- Recess taken at 10.37 a.m.

 5                           --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  While we're waiting for the witness to enter the

 7     courtroom, Mr. Lukic, have you found out by now who is responsible for

 8     the translation into English of the report of this --

 9             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  And that translation was done by

10     CLSS.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I think what we need is a thorough review of

12     what happened here.  And, of course, perhaps, Mr. Traldi, we'll wait for

13     all of your questions.  I do not know whether there are any other

14     inconsistencies, but --

15                           [The witness takes the stand]

16             MR. TRALDI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

17        Q.   Sir, just under the description of damage for this entry, we see

18     a photograph of the mosque which is labelled a pre-war photograph of the

19     mosque; right?

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Could we see the English translation, please.

21             THE WITNESS:  [No interpretation]

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it's in the reverse order to what we are used

24     to.  Perhaps we could have B/C/S to the left and English to the right

25     again.  There we are.

Page 37578

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MR. TRALDI:

 3        Q.   Sir, you see the caption to the first photograph, "photograph of

 4     the pre-war mosque"; right?

 5        A.   That's right.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  Can we now have P2510; page 218 in the English and

 7     219 in the B/C/S.  And I think we need the next page in the B/C/S.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we again have the usual order; that is, B/C/S

 9     to the left, English to the right.

10             MR. TRALDI:

11        Q.   Now, we don't -- yeah.

12             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It's the wrong page in on the right side on the

13     screen.

14             MR. TRALDI:  It's actually so far --

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Now we are there.  Now -- the B/C/S version was

16     right but disappeared now.  Now we have the English one on the right

17     side.  That should remain.  Very good.  There we are.

18             MR. TRALDI:  According to my notes, we don't have the page yet in

19     either language.  But my notes may be in error.  I'm afraid my Ringtail

20     isn't allowing me to double-check.  If we could turn back to the

21     beginning of this entry, which should be three pages earlier -- or four

22     pages earlier.  And we're on the previous entry on the left which is the

23     entry for Hodovici, and what we need is the beginning of the entry for

24     the Carsijska Dzamija.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I think we're now both in English and in the B/C/S

Page 37579

 1     on the previous entry.  You just tell us how many pages we should move

 2     forward, Mr. Traldi.

 3             MR. TRALDI:  219 in the B/C/S, which I ... and perhaps my speed

 4     was off the first time I'd asked, but it's 218 in the English, 219 in the

 5     B/C/S, the beginning of the entry for this mosque, and thankfully my

 6     notes were right this time.  We're on the second page in the English and

 7     need to turn back a page.  We now have the right page.

 8        Q.   So what we see before us is the beginning of Mr. Riedlmayer's

 9     entry for this site, and in the second paragraph you can read that he

10     mentions that:

11             "In video footage recorded on the 14th of July, 1995, the

12     Carsijska mosque and its minaret were still intact ..."

13             MR. TRALDI:  And if we could turn now to page 222 in the English,

14     which we've got in the B/C/S but not in the English.  We need 222 in the

15     English; 223 in the B/C/S.

16        Q.   So now we see the same picture that you've identified as the

17     pre-war mosque, and we see that it's clearly identified here as coming

18     from video footage recorded on the 14th of July, 1995 after Srebrenica

19     fell; right?

20        A.   That's right.

21        Q.   So one of the ways that you have simplified, in your words, this

22     entry, is removing the information that the mosque was still standing

23     after the falling of Srebrenica; right?

24        A.   No.  No, that's not correct.  Quite simply, that is not correct.

25        Q.   The information is in Mr. Riedlmayer's entry, it's not in yours,

Page 37580

 1     you made that decision.  Those things are all true; right?

 2        A.   Just a moment let me take a look.

 3        Q.   Yes, I see you're showing me the entry, sir.  You've identified

 4     this is a photograph of the pre-war mosque.  You've not referred to it

 5     correctly as a photograph of the mosque still standing on the 14th of

 6     July, 1995, after the fall of Srebrenica.  You've removed that

 7     information; right?

 8        A.   Maybe accidentally I wasn't paying attention to that.  But that I

 9     removed that in order to conceal something, that's ridiculous.  Why would

10     I do that when it can be seen from the photograph itself that it is based

11     on footage?  There's no need to explain it.  Just like what you have.

12     See?  It's from several clips that this photograph was created.  See?

13        Q.   Let's turn to the next page; page 223 in the English and 224 in

14     the B/C/S.  Now, this is the photo that you said you'd included in the

15     B/C/S but didn't show anything, wasn't necessary.  Mr. Riedlmayer

16     describes this one where you can see the destroyed minaret on the left

17     side in front of the same mosque as being taken on the 19th of July,

18     1995.  You have also simplified this entry by removing that information;

19     correct?

20        A.   Not correct.  You see, this photograph down here on the left --

21        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

22        A.   -- that's a photograph of the minaret.

23        Q.   You're pointing to things on your entry.  Point to where it says

24     the minaret was destroyed between the 14th and 19th of July, 1995.

25        A.   But you, Mr. Prosecutor, keep saying something that you've

Page 37581

 1     already got there.  You had this admitted into evidence.  That cannot be

 2     concealed.  I am speaking about the mode of demolition here.  That is

 3     what I'm interested in.  I didn't want to conceal anything here.  I did

 4     not want to copy everything that Riedlmayer wrote, who said what, and he

 5     even gives information here, who was buried, when.  That was not the

 6     subject of my work.  I am speaking only about buildings and the mode of

 7     demolition.  That's the only thing I'm interested in and that is part of

 8     my work.

 9        Q.   Sir, I'm going to interrupt you.

10        A.   And I --

11        Q.   You also include in your report an assertion that 10 of the 94

12     mosques that you purport to discuss were destroyed during combat

13     operations and 84 were destroyed during VRS withdrawal.  To make that

14     evaluation -- sorry, were destroyed after VRS withdrawal.

15             To make that evaluation, you would have to evaluate when the

16     mosques were destroyed, the precise information you have removed here;

17     right?

18        A.   No.  This is precisely the information that I collected from

19     Riedlmayer's report, and I obtained information as to what was demolished

20     in one case and what in the other.  Please do the counting and you will

21     reach the same conclusion that I reached.

22        Q.   We're going to look at a few examples, but let's start with this

23     one.  We see that Mr. Riedlmayer's caption - also not included in your

24     report - reflects that media shows that the mosque was destroyed the same

25     day the photo was taken, the 19th of July, 1995.  You're aware, of

Page 37582

 1     course, that Srebrenica was under VRS control at that time; right?

 2        A.   That's right.

 3        Q.   Did you consider this one that was destroyed during combat

 4     operations or after VRS withdrawal?

 5        A.   Well, look, I wasn't there.  I was not there.

 6        Q.   Sir, no -- sir --

 7        A.   I can accept what is written here.

 8        Q.   I'm asking how you came to a conclusion you provide in your

 9     expert report for which you provide no support or explanation.  You said

10     10 mosques were destroyed during combat, 84 were destroyed during

11     withdrawal.  Was this one of the ones that you say was destroyed during

12     combat or after withdrawal?

13        A.   Well, now you're asking me something -- I mean, I cannot remember

14     so many numbers.  I went from one building to another and made the

15     tables, and you can see that here.  I went from one building to the next,

16     and you can see here that I -- I mean, my time was very short, so I did

17     it afterwards.  From the first mosque in Bijeljina in Apacici in

18     July 1992, and then up to the mosque in Srebrenica, Slapovi, in 1995,

19     where I just recorded on the side precisely what Riedlmayer said.  I

20     didn't go into whether that was accurate or not.  I wasn't even

21     interested in the sources from which he acquired his data.

22        Q.   Sir, you're not answering my question.

23        A.   I'm just answering your question.

24        Q.   No, sir.  I'm afraid you're not.

25        A.   I don't know.  Perhaps you're not satisfied.

Page 37583

 1        Q.   My question is:  This mosque -- you say 10 during combat, 84

 2     after withdrawal.  In which category did you put this one?  It is a

 3     two-word answer.  Please provide it.

 4        A.   I can tell you that in a couple of words.  Let's see what

 5     Riedlmayer said.

 6        Q.   No, sir.  I'm not asking you to look for what Mr. Riedlmayer

 7     said.  I'm saying, first, you clearly haven't put this mosque in either

 8     category; right?

 9        A.   Well, I looked at 94 mosques.  I did not participate in the

10     Srebrenica operation, and I was not an eye-witness to any of those

11     events.

12        Q.   The other part of what I'm putting to you, sir, is that what

13     you're offering the Trial Chamber is a false dichotomy, that what you're

14     suggesting is the mosques were destroyed either during combat or after

15     withdrawal, and you've excluded information that shows this one was

16     destroyed just after the fighting was over but while the VRS maintained

17     clear control of the area.  That's the truth; right?

18        A.   Well, how could I know until when the VRS held any town under its

19     control?  Where would I get that information from?  Who would provide

20     this information to me?

21        Q.   If you didn't know whether --

22        A.   All I -- all I --

23        Q.   Sir, if you didn't know whether the VRS had withdrawn or whether

24     it maintained control, how could you have opined that the destructions

25     took place after VRS withdrawal?

Page 37584

 1        A.   I am telling you the whole time that what Mr. Riedlmayer wrote, I

 2     just put that in the table.  Just the data that he presented, nothing

 3     more.  What he had written.

 4        Q.   Let me be very clear about what I'm putting to you in fairness.

 5     You have offered the Trial Chamber in the body of your report unsupported

 6     conclusions which you do not explanation and which you now testify you do

 7     not know whether they are true or not, and in the attachment,

 8     Attachment P, you have included parts of Riedlmayer's work which you do

 9     not attribute to him.  And to the extent that you've gone anything

10     yourself, it has rendered that attachment less accurate than if you had

11     simply imagine plagiarised it.  That's the truth about the report you're

12     offering this Trial Chamber; right?

13        A.   Let me tell you one thing.  I -- when I was making this table and

14     the data that I was presenting, I am not going to claim that I'm 100

15     correct.  I might have made some errors.  But it's 90 per cent correct,

16     and the data is the data from Mr. Riedlmayer.  We can analyse everything.

17     Let's stay here one more day and go mosque by mosque and then we can

18     analyse exactly what it is and come to the truth and see what it's all

19     about.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, could I ask you one question between -- you

21     earlier said that the information about dates that you left out as

22     irrelevant was because you were interested in the mode of destruction,

23     not on when it happened.

24             Nevertheless, on page 30 of the English version of your report, I

25     read:

Page 37585

 1             "The time when the religious buildings were destroyed, or

 2     severely and slightly damaged, is as follows:"

 3             So you express an opinion about when that happened.  And then

 4     after having listed the various months and years, you summarise by

 5     saying:

 6             "Destruction of religious buildings took place:

 7             "* During combat operations ............... 10 buildings

 8             "* After VRS withdrawal ................... 84 buildings"

 9             What Mr. Traldi apparently is exploring is if you say:  "I don't

10     know whether they withdrew or not," how could you possibly qualify 10 as

11     being destroyed during combat operations and 84 buildings after VRS

12     withdrawal if you tell us at the same time that you do not know when the

13     VRS withdrew?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I am saying that in

15     Riedlmayer's report he was taking witness statements and they gave the

16     information to him.  This is what I'm talking about.  Now you would need

17     to read each report for each mosque in order to get that information and

18     that's where I got that information from.  I wasn't the one who was doing

19     the analysis.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.

21             MR. TRALDI:

22        Q.   Did you not understand your task as an expert who was providing

23     your opinion to do analysis supporting the conclusions that were going to

24     be contained in your report?

25        A.   I did that.  You take Mr. Riedlmayer's report and you read

Page 37586

 1     everything.  You would need to read the statements of his witnesses.  I

 2     took that as a relevant source of information, because that's what he did

 3     too.  I don't know how accurate they are.  I mean, if you're disputing

 4     the accuracy of his witness statements, then you can dispute also what I

 5     did.

 6        Q.   With that, sir, I'm going to turn away from your purported expert

 7     evidence to the factual evidence you provide first about the 1st Krajina

 8     Corps' engineering unit.

 9             You testified yesterday at transcript page 37533 that if an order

10     for an engineering unit in the 1st Krajina Corps's area of responsibility

11     to destroy something had been passed down the chain of command, you would

12     have been part of that process.  Now, that's not true before July 1992,

13     is it?

14        A.   I don't know where you get the date from and why it would be

15     relevant, the 30th of July.

16        Q.   You provide this broad assertion without a time-period, the

17     commander of the pontoon battalion wouldn't have been part of the chain

18     of command for an order to destroy a building, would he?

19        A.   That's correct.

20        Q.   And that was your position until July 1992; right?

21        A.   That's correct.

22        Q.   In fact, it's the chief of engineers who would have been part of

23     that chain; right?

24        A.   That's correct.

25        Q.   You did not hold that position until October 1992; right?

Page 37587

 1        A.   That's correct.

 2             MR. TRALDI:  Can we 65 ter 32853.

 3        Q.   I'm going to turn now, sir, to the topic of Muslim and Croat

 4     participation in the engineering units of the 1st Krajina Corps.

 5             Now, a number of Muslims and Croats were forcibly mobilised into

 6     the engineering regiment; right?

 7        A.   That is not correct.

 8        Q.   Now, this is a document coming from the command of the

 9     1st Engineers Regiment in Laktasi on the 10th of February 1993.  We see

10     it comes from the commander, Major Milan Nastic.  At the time --

11        A.   Nastic.

12        Q.   At the time, who was his immediate superior?

13        A.   According to the professional line, it was me.

14        Q.   So this is a document you would have reviewed yourself; right?

15        A.   I am seeing it for the first time, but I -- I don't doubt the

16     document.  It's his signature.

17             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have page 2 in both languages.

18        Q.   Now under point 2, "Morale of Unit," and it's at the bottom of

19     the page in the B/C/S, and the second bullet point from the bottom in the

20     English, we read:

21             "Combat morale has been particularly affected by the forcible

22     mobilisation of a large number of people, especially Muslims and

23     Croats ..."

24             So in early 1993 Muslims and Croats were forcibly mobilised into

25     the engineering regiment; right?

Page 37588

 1        A.   If that's what it says, then I believe that there was some of

 2     that, yes.

 3        Q.   And by that time, the 1st Krajina Corps had taken control of all

 4     the territories in its area and a great majority of the Muslim and Croat

 5     populations had departed; right?

 6        A.   Which territory are you thinking of here?  Is it Laktasi,

 7     Banja Luka, the Krajina region?

 8        Q.   Well, the 1st Krajina Corps had control over the Krajina region,

 9     it was the part that was its area of responsibility, and most of the

10     Muslims and Croat population that had lived there before the war by this

11     time was gone; right?

12        A.   I really didn't look into the percentage that is left, but I can

13     tell you something else regarding this document.  When a report like this

14     is drafted in the VRS units or the former JNA units, this bullet point

15     about the morale is not something that Nastic wrote.  This was written by

16     the -- a doctor who had a PhD in biology.  His name was Drago Trkulja, he

17     was the assistant for morale in my unit, and I believe that Nastic didn't

18     read this.  The commander didn't read it.  Had he read it, he wouldn't

19     have signed it.  The man simply wrote that just in order to write

20     something, but it wasn't really relevant.  It doesn't say anywhere the

21     actual number of Muslim and Croat soldiers involved here.

22        Q.   That's -- that's true.

23        A.   This is not referred to here, so if you take the date --

24        Q.   Now, sir, you provided, and they were discussed yesterday, lists

25     of Muslims and Croats in the engineering regiment; D1173 and 1174.  We've

Page 37589

 1     looked at those lists and about 20 per cent of the Muslims and 20

 2     per cent of the Croats who served in the engineering regiment in the

 3     entire war begun their service in the unit in the first half of 1993 when

 4     this document was drafted.  Those people were forcibly mobilised into the

 5     unit; right?

 6        A.   Correct.

 7             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honours, we've translated only the part of this

 8     document that I have used with the witness, point 2, the morale point.

 9     The B/C/S is the full document, and I'd just ask that it be MFI'd for the

10     moment.  We'll reduce the B/C/S at the end of the witness's testimony to

11     match the English if nothing else comes up.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, no problems with that?

13             Mr. Registrar, would you please assign a number.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  It shall be assigned Exhibit P7493.  Thank you.

15             MR. LUKIC:  I didn't hear your question, Your Honour.  I was --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  The question was whether you had any objections to

17     the document being MFI'd, pending a full translation.

18             MR. TRALDI:  Just so the record is clear, it was pending a

19     reduction of the B/C/S to match the English.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Rather to reduce the B/C/S rather than -- any

21     problem with that for context, Mr. Lukic?

22             MR. LUKIC:  No, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  P7493 is marked for identification.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I may?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please.

Page 37590

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can just add one thing here.  It

 2     wasn't just the Muslims and the Croats who were mobilised in 1993.  There

 3     were people, older people who were mobilised.  If we look at the tables,

 4     we can see that in that year Serbs, Croats, and Muslims were mobilised.

 5     Nobody was targeting Croats and Muslims for mobilisation.  I didn't

 6     conceal anything in the tables, and the tables and the numbers tell much

 7     more than what some assistant for morale wrote.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, what was read to you is about forcible --

 9     mobilisation of a large number of people, especially Muslims and Croats,

10     which means that there were others as well.  So therefore, that's what

11     already expressed in the document itself.

12             Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.

13             Do you have any personal knowledge about numbers?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I reviewed the figures in the

15     tables very precisely.  I didn't conceal anything.  Whatever was in the

16     VOBs, VOB-8s, it's also in the tables.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and I think Mr. Traldi did the same, and he

18     concluded about certain percentages.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. TRALDI:

21        Q.   Did that careful review also reveal that about 15 per cent of the

22     Muslims and 15 per cent of the Croats in your tables never served in the

23     VRS's 1st Engineering Regiment at all because they weren't -- they'd

24     concluded their service, according to the VOB, before the 19th of May,

25     1992?

Page 37591

 1        A.   That is not correct.  That is not correct.  I correctly noted

 2     down first and last name of those who were in the units until the end of

 3     the war.  Nothing is concealed there.

 4        Q.   And the Chamber can see the proportions from the document.

 5             Did your careful review reflect that almost 15 per cent of the

 6     Muslims were not mobilised until the second half of 1995?

 7        A.   No, from day one, from the 17th of September when the engineers

 8     regiment was formed as a war unit, they were mobilised.  They were

 9     receiving summons to report to their war-time units.  This was the usual

10     manner of mobilising people.  There were volunteers but mostly that was

11     the mobilisation system.

12        Q.   Let me focus very precisely on the information in the VOB.

13             Did your careful review reflect that 15 per cent of the Muslim,

14     about, did not join the engineering regiment according to the document

15     you provided until the second half of 1995?

16        A.   No, no.  There is continuity.  There are Muslims in 1991, 1992,

17     1993, 1994, 1995 who were in the engineering regiment.  At the same time,

18     you have people who are leaving for different reasons.  There are those

19     who are deserting, those who are being transferred.  It's a living

20     organism.  You cannot --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, the simple question is whether you agree

22     that 15 per cent of the Muslims which were recorded joined only in the

23     second half of 1995.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If that's what is written there,

25     then, yes, that's it.  If it's there in the diagram, then I agree.

Page 37592

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.

 2             MR. TRALDI:

 3        Q.   Judge Orie and Judge Fluegge yesterday asked you about the

 4     significance of the ones who began their service on 9th of October, 1995.

 5     Now, you first claimed these were volunteers, and then you later

 6     testified that a student brigade was mobilised on that date.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Was it the 9th or 29th?

 8             MR. TRALDI:  The 9th.

 9        Q.   First, the truth is these were not volunteers.  They were people

10     who were mobilised; right?

11        A.   Absolutely.

12        Q.   And the significance of the date, October 1995, is that at that

13     point the VRS no longer had the overwhelming military superiority it had

14     enjoyed in the Bosnian Krajina in 1992; right?

15        A.   Well, I wouldn't put it like that, that it didn't have the

16     overwhelming military power.  Had it not had the power, nothing -- it

17     wouldn't have had any successes, so somebody had to have been doing.

18        Q.   Well, in 1992 -- let's put it very simply.  1992, the VRS was

19     taking control of territory in the Bosnian Krajina, including Sanski Most

20     and Kljuc.  In October 1995, the VRS was losing control of the territory

21     in the Bosnian Krajina, including Sanski Most and Kljuc; right?

22        A.   That's correct.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mladic should not speak aloud and not comment on

24     what is asked, and this is the one, first, and last warning.

25             Please proceed.

Page 37593

 1             MR. TRALDI:

 2        Q.   And so where, in 1992, Muslims like the one you mentioned were

 3     sent to Belgrade to resolve their status, in 1995, there was a level the

 4     desperation and so people that the VRS would never have used in 1992 were

 5     being impressed into service.  That's the truth; right?

 6        A.   In 1992, all those who were on the list, on the -- of the

 7     military conscripts list, were called up.  A number of them reported and

 8     number of them did not.  There is a battalion - an example - that by

 9     establishment numbered 860 people, and I had about 276 respond to the

10     first call-up.  And in percentages, the same number of Croats, Muslims,

11     and Serbs failed to report.  So this did not apply just to one ethnic

12     group.  They all had the same -- or they were all thinking along the same

13     lines.

14        Q.   About how many people were in the engineering regiment in 1992?

15        A.   I can read that.  1038.

16        Q.   And your VOB reflects that 200 or so Muslims served in the

17     engineering regiment at any point in the war, of which we've just

18     established that half of them were force -- taken together, half of them

19     were either forcibly mobilised in the beginning of 1993, only joined at

20     the end of 1995, or had left before the 19th of May, 1992.

21             So at the most, even based on what we've just discussed, a very,

22     very small percentage of that unit, in 1992, was comprised of Muslims;

23     right?

24        A.   It's there in the table.  The forceful mobilisation applied to

25     Serbs, Croats, and Muslims who were in the territory of the

Page 37594

 1     municipalities from where the 1st Engineering Regiment was being

 2     replenished --

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat that last

 4     sentence.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, could you please repeat your last sentence.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Serbs, Croats, and Muslims were

 7     mobilised all in the same way.  They were -- each of them tried to evade

 8     mobilisation.  There were volunteers.  I mean, I could have written that

 9     in here as well, put in a column indicating the volunteers, but I didn't.

10             MR. TRALDI:

11        Q.   And to conclude this topic, sir, you mentioned yesterday a

12     specific person named in the VOB who, on the 10th of July, 1992, you said

13     was sent by the unit to Belgrade.

14             Now, the Chamber has received evidence, and it's P4971 for the

15     parties, that on the 9th of July, 1992, General Mladic issued an order

16     that Muslim and Croat officers should be sent to Belgrade to resolve

17     their status.  It's not a coincidence that that's what happened to this

18     man on the 10th of July; right?

19        A.   That's not correct.  It's not correct.  I was the commander of

20     the engineers regiment at that time.  I had sent him to the commander of

21     a battalion.  I had sent him to an assignment to work out the rocket

22     positions --

23             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat what he is

24     saying.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, Witness, Witness, the interpreters invite

Page 37595

 1     you to repeat what you said.  You said:

 2             "I had sent him to an assignment to work out the rocket

 3     positions..."

 4             Could you repeat what you then said.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the evening, some of his

 6     soldiers got drunk and they were going to kill their superior commander

 7     who happened to be a Muslim.  He avoided that first contact.  He escaped

 8     to a house.  A woman saved him.  She hid him.  And in the morning he was

 9     transferred to the command and then we sent him to Belgrade.  It was very

10     difficult for us.  We were very sorry about all of that.  He was a very

11     Goodman and a very good professional, an expert, but it was untenable for

12     us to continue to keep him in the unit.

13             MR. TRALDI:

14        Q.   Threatening to kill a superior commander, that's a serious crime

15     for a soldier to commit; right?

16        A.   Absolutely.

17        Q.   So if we were to check the log of the Banja Luka military court,

18     we ought to find convictions and long sentences to terms of imprisonment

19     for these people that had made such a threat; right?

20        A.   That's right.  That was reported.  Believe me, I didn't follow

21     what happened later.  I just know that I detained these people, that they

22     were handed over to the military police, and I think that after a while

23     they returned to the unit.  And that's it.

24        Q.   That's because they weren't sentenced to a term of imprisonment.

25     They were taken back into the unit, like huge numbers of other VRS

Page 37596

 1     soldiers who committed crimes against Muslims and Croats that the command

 2     and military justice system knew about and just sent the same criminals

 3     back to the front; right?

 4        A.   I don't know about other cases.  I know about this case.  It

 5     happened there where I was personally, and that's what I could have done

 6     myself.

 7             As for the state and the system, whether they could have done

 8     more and whether they did more, I wasn't following that.  Whether they

 9     were prosecuted later, I don't know about that.  Maybe they were.

10             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have 65 ter 07036.  And I'm turning to a

11     different topic now.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  While we're waiting for that, could you tell us why

13     this person was sent to Belgrade?  For what purpose and what happened to

14     him there?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Quite simply to protect him.  Later

16     on, he went to third countries.  We were on such good terms with him for

17     years.  He attended military exercises with us.  We were on such good

18     terms, a very positive person in every conceivable respect.  There you

19     go.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

21             MR. TRALDI:

22        Q.   And it's right, isn't it, that this positive person who you'd

23     known for years before the war but happened to be a Muslim, he couldn't

24     stay in the unit, he was sent to Belgrade, he was never brought back, and

25     the people who threatened to kill their superior commander for being a

Page 37597

 1     Muslim were brought back and accepted into the unit.  That's your

 2     evidence; right?

 3        A.   After a while, what the consequences were, I mean a month or two

 4     later, I really don't know, but I know they were taken away by the

 5     military police, you know.  Now the question here is whether all of that

 6     could have been processed at the time under these circumstances, you

 7     know.  This Court needs a lot of time to resolve things too, let alone us

 8     in a situation of war.

 9        Q.   Sir, let's look at this document, one of the other activities of

10     the 1st Engineering Regiment in 1992.

11             The 1st Engineering Regiment also used people held prisoner at

12     Manjaca camp to labour, for instance, on building fortifications for VRS

13     positions; right?

14        A.   That is what is written.

15        Q.   And we see it says Colonel Lazar, and the last name is illegible.

16     That's Colonel Lazar Kosanovic who at the time, the 2nd of October, 1992,

17     was your immediate superior; right?

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We could not understand

19     what the witness was saying, overlapping speakers.

20             MR. TRALDI:

21        Q.   Sir, I'd ask you to wait for the end of my question.

22     Colonel Lazar, that we see here with the last name illegible, that's

23     Lazar Kosanovic, and on this date, 2nd October, 1992, he was your

24     immediate superior; right?

25        A.   That's right.

Page 37598

 1             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 07036.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  We object and we would object to this line of

 3     questions at all.  This is our expert witness for destruction of

 4     religious sites.

 5             MR. TRALDI:  The witness has testified repeatedly during both

 6     direct and cross that he was giving information on the basis of his

 7     personal knowledge.  We explained in our notification of what we were

 8     going to challenge that we understood that much of his evidence was based

 9     on his personal knowledge, for instance --

10             MR. LUKIC:  But for evidence in connection of destruction of

11     religious sites.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but isn't it true that the composition of the

13     unit was a major part of who were in the unit and that that is part of

14     his expert report and that this may be relevant to complete that picture?

15             MR. LUKIC:  If you think so, Your Honour, but we do not share

16     that opinion.

17             MR. TRALDI:  And --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  The objection is denied.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. TRALDI:  Then I'd --

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  The number.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Shall be assigned Exhibit P7494.  Thank you.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  P7494 is admitted.

25             MR. TRALDI:

Page 37599

 1        Q.   And the Chamber has received evidence that Muslims detained at

 2     Manjaca were also impressed into assisting the engineers regiment in

 3     rebuilding, for instance, an Orthodox church at Sljivno.  You're aware of

 4     that; right?

 5        A.   I was not up there, but I claim that these people were never part

 6     of the regiment.  These men, as for this order that is written and what

 7     you're saying now --

 8        Q.   Sir --

 9        A.   -- it is possible that --

10        Q.   Sir, they were forced to assist the regiment.  They weren't part

11     of the regiment.  They were prisoners; right?

12        A.   I am saying to you that the regiment was not dealing with the

13     church at Manjaca.  The church is right above the facilities where the

14     people were held captive.  The regiment never commanded --

15        Q.   Sir --

16        A.   -- these people and never --

17        Q.   Sir --

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We didn't hear the end of

19     the witness's sentence.

20             MR. TRALDI:

21        Q.   -- I'm going to stop you.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, if could you first repeat the end of your

23     sentence.  You said:  "The regiment never commanded these people," which,

24     as far as I understand, was not suggested in the question.  And then you

25     said:  "And never ..." and could you repeat what you said then.

Page 37600

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These people were never prisoners

 2     of the engineering regiment, and they were not used for carrying out

 3     work.  It's a huge number of people; 110 people to be involved in working

 4     on a church?  And the dimensions are, say, 8 by 8 metres, 8 by 10, or

 5     something --

 6             MR. TRALDI:

 7        Q.   Sir, I'm going to ask you to focus carefully on my question.

 8     We've moved passed this document, which is about the road company, the

 9     camouflage company, and the company building fortifications.  What I'm

10     putting to you now is you're also aware that people detained at Manjaca -

11     prisoners there - were impressed into assisting the engineer's regiment

12     in reconstructing a church at place called Sljivno.  You know that;

13     right?

14        A.   Again I'm saying to you, do count these men:  121, 47, 110,

15     200 --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, I'm going to stop you.  Was the engineers

17     regiment involved in reconstructing a church in Sljivno?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

20             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have P238.  Sorry, my notes on this may be

21     inaccurate or this may not be P238.  Based on the ERN, I can see it's

22     not.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Any suggestion how to resolve it?  Do we have the --

24             MR. TRALDI:  By pulling up P238, which is what we have now.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Please proceed.

Page 37601

 1             MR. TRALDI:

 2        Q.   Now, this is a 1st Krajina Corps order.  We see it comes from

 3     General Talic.  It's dated 22 August, 1992, on the basis of the

 4     demonstrated need to repair the Serbian Orthodox church in the village of

 5     Sljivno, and he is issuing this order.  Point 2, he says:

 6             "The construction of an access road, preparation of the terrain,

 7     shall be carried out by the engineers of the 1st Krajina Corps ..."

 8             Point 3:

 9             "Professional instruction for and supervision of the construction

10     shall be ensured by the construction service of the 1st Krajina Corps.

11             Point 5:

12             "The collection centre at Manjaca shall provide the workforce to

13     carry out all the work on the site ..."

14             Now, 22nd of August, 1992, by this point you were the commander

15     of the engineering regiment.  Can we take it this refreshes your

16     recollection as to whether prisoners at Manjaca were impressed into

17     assisting with the reconstruction of the church at Sljivno?

18        A.   Everything is possible.  I'm just telling you one thing.  The

19     engineers regiment had nothing to do up there in relation to this

20     approach road that had already been built.  The church had been destroyed

21     there.  There were foundations there.  It is construction people that

22     were needed there; builders, bricklayers.  As for the regiment, such a

23     powerful unit, to engage them there, there was no need for that.  This

24     was not written by Lazar Kosanovic who was too much of a professional to

25     write up something like this.

Page 37602

 1             Perhaps I sent a machine or two.  But to remember 20 years later,

 2     that is virtually impossible.  I'm just telling you that the regiment did

 3     not participate here.  Just look here at the team that was appointed to

 4     carry out this work.  There is no reference to the regiment.  If 200 of

 5     my men were involved there -- or actually my men and 200 prisoners,

 6     people would have known about that.

 7        Q.   Sir --

 8        A.   Finally one more thing.  At Manjaca --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please finish that sentence.  At Manjaca,

10     you said?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Even at Manjaca you had an

12     engineering unit within the school centre, so I had no need to be

13     involved up there.  You had bulldozers there and excavators and so on and

14     so forth.

15             MR. TRALDI:

16        Q.   That engineering units answered to Colonel Kosanovic, the one

17     located in the school centre?

18        A.   Everything down the professional line.  After this order he could

19     have said there's no need to send anyone up there because you've got that

20     unit up there --

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We didn't understand the

22     last sentence.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you repeat the last sentence which was not

24     understood by the interpreters.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I assumed that this was written

Page 37603

 1     from somebody from the command who doesn't know a thing about

 2     engineering.  And when Kosanovic probably received this order, he said:

 3     "You have a unit, you have mechanisation, you have equipment up there.

 4     You've got everything and you can handle all that."  And it was the

 5     commander of the school centre at Manjaca that had all that, because I

 6     never received from Kosanovic any such thing because he would have told

 7     me in that case to involve the regiment.  Had Kosanovic written an order

 8     to me, he would have said:  Send such-and-such and such a thing, or he

 9     would have asked me to reconnoitre to see what it was that I needed.

10     This was written by a layperson, this order.

11             MR. TRALDI:

12        Q.   Sir, a moment ago you said maybe I sent a machine or two.  Now,

13     you're excited --

14        A.   Possibly, maybe.  I cannot rule that out.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  Could you please allow Mr. Traldi to

16     finish his question.

17             MR TRALDI:

18        Q.   So my point is now you've gotten visibly excited by the

19     possibility and deny that there was any involvement of the engineering

20     regiment, claim that anybody who would have written an order suggesting

21     the engineering regiment be involved must not know anything about

22     engineering, you are simply trying to exculpate yourself and your

23     regiment and providing for the umpteenth time today evidence that you do

24     not know whether it's true or not.  That's what's going on; right?

25        A.   No, you're not right.  You're not right.  You think that after 20

Page 37604

 1     years, after 20 years -- well, maybe somebody called me and said, say,

 2     "Send an excavator up there" or something like that.  Do you know how

 3     much that mattered to me at that moment?  You know, you've got thousands

 4     of other tasks that are far more important and far more interesting.

 5             There's no war or anything in Manjaca, you see.  But to link up

 6     an entire unit for the building of a little church, 7 by 8 metres, that

 7     is mind-boggling.  And to send 200 prisoners to do that, that would have

 8     required a company of soldiers to guard them.  And now this is what

 9     you're putting to me.  That's why I'm saying I'm so sorry that I don't

10     have my work notebooks that you took away and that was part of my

11     war-time document, and probably now we could find very easily an oral

12     order, say that Colonel Kosanovic sent to me, said "do such-and-such a

13     thing."

14             There were written orders, there were oral orders, and I wrote

15     all of that in my work notebook only, and now you are expecting me, 25

16     years later, to remember where I sent which machine.  That is ridiculous.

17     Maybe I did send it, but I don't rule out that possibility.  I cannot be

18     unfair.

19        Q.   Sir, in the future if you don't remember the answer to my

20     question, I'd ask you to simply tell us that.  And I have one more

21     question before the break.

22             You don't remember any of the myriad destroyed mosques and

23     destroyed Catholic churches in the 1st Krajina Corps's area of

24     responsibility being rebuilt during the war, do you?

25        A.   I beg your pardon.

Page 37605

 1        Q.   You do not remember any of the hundreds of destroyed mosques and

 2     destroyed Catholic churches in the 1st Krajina Corps's area or anywhere

 3     else that you saw in preparing your expert report being rebuilt during

 4     the war, do you?

 5        A.   I remember just one.  Very well at that.  I remember when I was

 6     going down a road I saw these buildings destroyed and that really hurt

 7     me.  Really afflicted me.  And it was hard for me to communicate with

 8     soldiers of Croat and Muslim ethnicity who were at war with us, and

 9     buildings were being destroyed in the way they were being destroyed.  I

10     remember that full well.  And believe me, these contacts were very hard

11     for me, terribly hard for me.  There were soldiers who would walk up to

12     me and say:  "What do we do now, commander?", you know?  These are

13     terrible things.  And some idiot did what he did and committed the kind

14     of things that were committed, and I can guarantee that I never was

15     involved in any kind of thing.  It's not that I am getting worked up or

16     whatever it was that you said.  I'm just trying to remember all of these

17     things that you're asking me about.

18             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  And can you now please answer the question.  Was

19     there a single mosque or Catholic church rebuilt during the war?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, no.  As far as I

21     saw, no.

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  That could have been the short answer to the

23     question.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, you started your answer by saying:  "I

25     remember just one."  Which one do you remember?

Page 37606

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, probably I am saying when I was

 2     passing by and I went to deal with different tasks and ...

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you have no recollection as which one you

 4     referred to.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.  Could you refresh my

 6     memory?

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  I'm asking you to explain what you said, that

 8     you remembered just one, but apparently you don't remember where and when

 9     exactly.

10             Before we take the break, I'd like to invite you to do the

11     following.  We considerably -- Mr. Traldi paid considerable attention to

12     the Srebrenica mosque and the dates given by Mr. Riedlmayer which do not

13     completely -- which are not completely reflected in your report.  You

14     said that some of the mosques were destroyed during combat and others

15     were destroyed after withdrawal.

16             Mr. Traldi asked you several times how you categorised the

17     Srebrenica mosque, whether it was in your account -- well, one second,

18     please.  One second, please.  In your -- whether, in your account, it was

19     among the 10 or the 84.  I'd like to know whether you considered the

20     Srebrenica mosque as being destroyed during combat operations or after

21     withdrawal, in which category you put this Srebrenica mosque.

22             I take it that you have notes somewhere which would allow you to

23     specify which ones are among the 10 - I think that was after withdrawal -

24     and which one are under the -- no, the 10 during combat and which one are

25     among the 84 which were destroyed after withdrawal.

Page 37607

 1             I'd like to know, on the basis of your notes, how you categorised

 2     the Srebrenica mosque.  If you could try to find that out during the

 3     break, that would be appreciated.  We take the break now.  You're invited

 4     to follow the usher.

 5             We resume at ...

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  If you take your earphones off.

 8                           [The witness stands down]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at 25 minutes to 1.00.

10                           --- Recess taken at 12.15 p.m.

11                           --- On resuming at 12.37 p.m.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi you're on your feet.

13             MR. TRALDI:  Just to use the time, Mr. President, I can inform

14     the Chamber and the Defence that the portion of 65 ter 32853 that I'd

15     used with the witness has now been uploaded as 65 ter 32853A.  And if the

16     Defence has no objection, we'd request that that be admitted as P7493.

17                           [The witness takes the stand]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I see from Mr. Lukic's body language that there is

19     no objection.

20             Mr. Registrar, you are hereby instructed to replace 65 ter 32853

21     by 65 ter 32853A, and P7493 is admitted into evidence.

22             Please proceed.

23             MR. TRALDI:

24        Q.   Sir, before I return to my questions, before the break Judge Orie

25     had inquired whether you were able to categorise the Carsijska Dzamija in

Page 37608

 1     Srebrenica, whether you were able to figure out whether you categorised

 2     this as having been destroyed during combat or after VRS withdrawal.  Do

 3     you have an answer to that question?

 4        A.   It was during combat, around the 19th of July.  As for what I've

 5     read now, I believe the army was still there.  On that basis, I recorded

 6     it that way.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  You recorded it as having been destroyed during

 8     combat?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And do you --

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, no.  No.  The army was

12     still there.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but was it destroyed during --

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, but there was no combat.

15     No combat at the time.  So the mosque was destroyed after combat.  There

16     was no combat in Srebrenica after that and it was recorded.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Neither had the VRS withdrawn at that time from

18     Srebrenica?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I so assume.

20             MR. TRALDI:

21        Q.   And so the original point that I'd been putting to you, that many

22     of these mosques were destroyed not during combat and also not after VRS

23     withdrawal but when the VRS had control of the area, that's the truth;

24     right?

25        A.   No, you're wrong.  As for some buildings, yes; but most of them,

Page 37609

 1     no.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  But do you then agree that a third category is

 3     missing; that is, destroyed not in a combat situation when the Serb --

 4     the VRS was still in control of the area?  That's a third category which

 5     is ignored in your report.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, not ignored.  When you look

 7     at Riedlmayer's report and witness statements and statements of the

 8     Islamic religious community, they say after the withdrawal of the army,

 9     after the population moved out, such-and-such and such happened, and

10     that's most of the cases, you know.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  But if only on the basis of this one example - I'm

12     not talking about the others - you would have needed a third category.

13     And the question that would arise then is how many other such incidents

14     would fall into that category, and that's what I call ignoring that third

15     option.  Do you agree with that?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With that, I agree, absolutely.

17     You're right.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

19             MR. TRALDI:

20        Q.   Now, you discuss a number of sites in Prijedor, the Chamber has

21     received evidence that the 43rd Motorised Brigade was based there.  For a

22     site that was destroyed after the end of fighting in Prijedor but while

23     the 43rd Brigade was still based there, did you consider that to be

24     destroyed during combat or after withdrawal?

25        A.   I think that all buildings after combat operations were over were

Page 37610

 1     destroyed not at the time when the area was under the control of the

 2     43rd Motorised Brigade from Prijedor.  That is correct.  Because at that

 3     time the Prijedor Brigade was carrying out speedy preparations for

 4     Operation Corridor.  If is somebody is trying to say to me here that the

 5     destruction of religious buildings was the priority of that brigade at

 6     the time, that's ridiculous.  If anyone knows what the priority was at

 7     that time in Banja Luka and --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We didn't hear the end.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, I'm stopping you there.  No one asked you

11     about priorities.  The question put to you by Mr. Traldi simply was

12     whether mosques destroyed in the Prijedor area after the initial combat

13     operations there, whether you agree that they were destroyed when the

14     43rd Motorised Brigade was still based there?

15             That's the question.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Part of the Prijedor Brigade were

17     in brigade, not everybody left Prijedor.  It was their home municipality,

18     logistics was there for them.  But to assert that at that time the entire

19     area of responsibility, which was free, there were no Muslims there, why

20     would the units of the Prijedor Brigade be in the villages?  What would

21     they be doing in the villages?  What would be their role there?

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, you apparently have found questions you

23     consider more relevant than the questions that are put to you and which

24     you consistently do not respond to.

25             Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.

Page 37611

 1             MR. TRALDI:

 2        Q.   Your evidence about what the 43rd Brigade was doing, is that

 3     based on any study you did for this report or is it based on your

 4     recollection of events in 1992 from your time as a VRS officer; one or

 5     the other?

 6        A.   This is already personal.  In June 1993, I was in the field --

 7        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

 8        A.   -- for a month --

 9        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.  Is your evidence about what the

10     Prijedor Brigade did, that you just provided, is that based on your study

11     in preparing this report, or is it based on your memory of events, of

12     facts that you remember learning during the war?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And you were referring to 1992, whereas the

14     witness started his answer referring to 1993.

15             MR. TRALDI:  That's right.

16        Q.   And I'm focusing on your evidence about its priorities in 1992.

17        A.   I keep telling you that my summary about the destruction of

18     buildings after the combat was over was taken from the material that was

19     analysed by Riedlmayer.  But I am saying that in 1992, pursuant to a

20     corps command order, I was in Krecane where the Prijedor Brigade

21     Battalion was.  The commander was Bojic.  He's now in the Assembly of the

22     B and H.  I was at his command for a month as assistance, and so I was

23     speaking with them at that time, that literally after the completion of

24     the Kozarac operation and when the rifles stopped shooting and in view of

25     the fact when the buildings were destroyed, you cannot link that up with

Page 37612

 1     the time that the Prijedor Brigade was there.  The Prijedor Brigade was,

 2     throughout that period, based at the barracks in Prijedor.  So it's very

 3     hard to separate that.  You keep telling me that the Prijedor Brigade was

 4     there up until that time and then it went somewhere, but no.  Actually,

 5     some units remained there.

 6        Q.   Well, this Chamber has received --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, I again have to establish that the

 8     witness blaming you for telling him all kind of things, whereas you

 9     invite him to tell what he knows.  The witness has not answered the

10     question.

11             Please, next question.

12             MR. TRALDI:

13        Q.   So, again, sir, I'm exploring your repeated assertions that many

14     of these were destroyed after withdrawal.  You just made that in regard

15     to the Prijedor mosques.  Now, the Chamber has received evidence about

16     VRS operations in the Brdo area during the week of the 20th to 25th

17     July 1992 in Prijedor municipality.  You know from your review of the

18     Riedlmayer report, I'm sure, that that report reflects the destruction of

19     the Rizvanovici mosque, the Carakovo mosque, and the Brisevo Catholic

20     church during that same period.  Did you categorise those sites as

21     destroyed during combat or after VRS withdrawal?

22        A.   A number was destroyed in combat.  The bulk was destroyed after

23     the withdrawal of the VRS.  If you take the date there --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, could you focus on the three examples

25     mentioned by Mr. Traldi.

Page 37613

 1             The first:  Rizvanovici mosque.  During combat or after

 2     withdrawal?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What was the date?  I -- I can't

 4     answer just like that.

 5             MR. TRALDI:

 6        Q.   The 21st of July.

 7        A.   I don't remember.

 8        Q.   The 21st of July.  The date, sir, if it assists, is the --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  Mr. Traldi gave you the week of the

10     20th to the 25th of July, 1992.  How did you categorise the destruction

11     of that mosque?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no combat at that time.

13     It was finished.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Fine.  Fine.  So therefore it could not have

15     been in combat.  Was it after the withdrawal of the VRS from that area?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely, correct.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Do I understand your testimony to be that in the

18     week of the 20th to the 25th of July, 1992, the VRS had withdrawn from

19     the area where that mosque is located?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

21             MR TRALDI:

22        Q.   Now, the Chamber has received evidence from number of Defence

23     witnesses who were in the Prijedor Brigade - Drasko Vujic, Miso Rodic -

24     who testified that the brigade did carry out operations in the Brdo area

25     during that period.  You weren't in the brigade.  As far as I can tell

Page 37614

 1     from your report, you weren't in Prijedor in 1992.  Are those soldiers in

 2     the brigade wrong and you're right?

 3        A.   I don't know what the brigade's soldiers could have been doing in

 4     the villages and with the mosques in July and who had sent them there.

 5        Q.   That's the truth.  You don't know.  You haven't studied any VRS

 6     documentation.  You have no idea when the VRS was conducting operations

 7     in any particular area.  That's the truth; right?

 8        A.   No, I do know.  I know when combat ended in Prijedor.  It didn't

 9     last for three months.  It was going on for 15 days.  After that, there

10     was no more combat there.  There were groups of savages there who were

11     doing what they were doing.  That's the whole point of the story.  As to

12     whether that person wore a uniform or not --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, that's an answer perhaps to another

14     question.  After that period of combat in the Prijedor area, did the VRS

15     withdraw from that area, yes or no?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I'm saying again:  A number

17     of the war units did set off for the corridor operation.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, I'm not asking whether some troops left.

19     I'm asking you whether the VRS withdrew from that area after these combat

20     operations.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You know, you are asking me to

22     specify for you the exact area from where the military withdrew, but the

23     army was based in the barracks.  It wasn't out in the field.  It wasn't

24     out in the villages.  It didn't operate in the villages.  This is what

25     I'm talking about.  As for somebody perhaps who stepped beyond the

Page 37615

 1     regulations, that's another thing.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Do I have to understand your testimony to be that

 3     after the combat operations in Prijedor, the army remained in the

 4     barracks and didn't leave the barracks and were not in control of that

 5     region?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The terrain was cleared,

 7     practically.  So there were no more any elements against which it would

 8     be necessary to fight.  The operation was completed.  There were no

 9     combat actions once the clearing was over.  There was no army in the

10     villages.  The mosques were mostly in the villages.

11             As those who were wandering around, looting, going about, which

12     groups, that's something that I cannot speak about.  But as far as I

13     know, the Prijedor Brigade -- there was none of that in the

14     Prijedor Brigade as far as I know during the war and later.  It's

15     simply --

16             MR. TRALDI:

17        Q.   Sir --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  They were staying in the barracks and there was no

19     need to be in the field because combat was over and therefore you would

20     just stay in the barracks.  Is that your testimony?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. TRALDI:

25        Q.   Sir --

Page 37616

 1             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  One follow-up question.  Which army did have

 2     control over the villages in that area when the VRS stayed behind in the

 3     barracks?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no able-bodied population

 5     once the operation was over.  All that was left were women, children.

 6     All the able-bodied people were removed, so there was nobody to fight

 7     against.  What sort of a danger did they pose?

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  You didn't answer my question.  Which army had

 9     control over these villages at that point in time?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I assume that it was the official

11     organs, the police.  The army had no business being there.  The army had

12     finished its job.  You had the police, the legal organs, and so on and so

13     forth.  I guess that was part of their job.

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

15             MR. TRALDI:

16        Q.   So the simple answer to the question I'd originally asked you,

17     sir, is your evidence is the Trial Chamber should believe you and not the

18     Defence witnesses from the 43rd Brigade who testified that these

19     operations took place.  That's what you're asking the Chamber to do;

20     right?

21        A.   No -- well, it depends on what people say an operation was.  I

22     mean, if there was looting and robbery and so on during the operation,

23     that was one thing, but it was not part of the combat operation.

24        Q.   I'm going to ask about two more examples.  Novoseoci mosque in

25     Sokolac, did you classify that as destroyed during combat or after VRS

Page 37617

 1     withdrawal?  The date is the 22nd of September, 1992.

 2        A.   Mosque in?  Novoseoci, is that correct?

 3        Q.   Yes.  Did you classify that as destroyed during combat or after

 4     VRS withdrawal?

 5             Now before you answer, I see you're looking at Mr. Riedlmayer's

 6     report.  That's because there is no place in your own materials where it

 7     says which mosques you claim were destroyed during combat and which you

 8     claim were destroyed after withdrawal; right?

 9        A.   No.  I took exclusively Mr. Riedlmayer's data.  I didn't have

10     other data.  I was not in Sokolac.  I didn't go to Prijedor.  I mean, I

11     didn't go anywhere.  I just went to two mosques which I analysed in

12     detail.  That was the Ferhadija mosque and the Petricevac monastery,

13     nothing else.  All the other data I took from the data of your expert.

14     That's the point of the story.  And on the basis of that, I wrote my own

15     analysis.  I didn't go into whether it was true or not.  I wasn't

16     interested in that.  I just looked at what Mr. Riedlmayer had written.

17     Had I wanted to deal with that, I would have needed two years to complete

18     my report, not a week -- well, not seven days but seven hours.

19        Q.   And the Novoseoci mosque, which of your two categories did you

20     put it into?

21        A.   After the combat was over, of course.  I mean, even the date here

22     indicates that.  The date is very clear.

23        Q.   Now the Chamber has received the commander of the 2nd Romanija

24     Brigade's report to the Main Staff and the SRK command that day - it's

25     P3822 - and he reports that the village of Novoseoci was cleansed that

Page 37618

 1     day, and evidence in this case reflects that the male residents were

 2     massacred.  Did you consider evidence like that in determining whether to

 3     list something as during combat operations or after, quote/unquote,

 4     withdrawal?

 5        A.   Again, I am repeating the same thing.  You expect me in seven

 6     hours of work to look at all of those documents, the report written by a

 7     the commander of that unit.  How could I have had access to that

 8     information?  Mostly here I looked at the techniques, the manner, and the

 9     proportions of the building, the manner in which the building was

10     demolished.  This was something that was of interest in the -- the manner

11     in which the former JNA, according to its regulations, would do something

12     like that.  As for what some commander wrote, well, that should have been

13     presented to me, and then I would have given my opinion on that as well.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Can I just ask for a clarification.

15             Sir, you say you had only seven hours to do this job and

16     therefore you couldn't read the necessary material.  Do we have to

17     understand, therefore, that you have no evidentiary material before you

18     upon which you base your professional opinion that 10 of the mosques were

19     destroyed during combat and 84 were destroyed after the withdrawal of the

20     army?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, all that information I

22     tried, and I think I succeeded in covering, through Mr. Riedlmayer's

23     report.  I analysed his information.  I did not go into whether the

24     information was truthful or not.  All I did was create an overview of

25     what was destroyed when.  I had no other information, and I didn't go

Page 37619

 1     into the truthfulness of the data.  All I did is consider the report and

 2     what the witnesses told him on the basis of which he drafted the report,

 3     and mainly the sources were the Islamic community and some humanitarian

 4     organisations and trips to the field.  I myself wasn't there.

 5             In order for me to go all of these 94 mosques and to look at

 6     them, I would have needed at least three or four months, and that would

 7     also take into account all the logistics required for something like

 8     that.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Let me stop you there because you haven't begun to

10     answer my question.  I'm asking you about your opinion that you're giving

11     this Court, that 10 of the mosques were destroyed during combat and 84

12     were destroyed after the withdrawal of the VRS, and I'm asking you:  Do

13     you have any evidence on which you base that opinion now that you're

14     telling us you had limited time and you didn't read all the material that

15     could have given you the information that you required to make that

16     determination.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Throughout the war, wherever there

18     was combat, after certain terrain or towns were liberated, the army

19     wouldn't stay there for five or ten days after that.  Then the assistant

20     commander for civilian affairs would be sent to that town, and then he

21     would establish contact with the town authorities, and so on and so

22     forth.  That was the system of work.  So the army had nothing to do in

23     the terrain where there was no longer any enemy other than places where

24     the lines were being held.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I'm -- okay.

Page 37620

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And this was not the case in

 2     Prijedor.

 3             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I have not asked you any question about the army

 4     or what it does after combat.  You obviously are not answering my

 5     question.

 6             You may proceed, Mr. Traldi.

 7             MR. TRALDI:

 8        Q.   One last example.

 9             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have 65 ter 19777; page 69 in the English, 68

10     in the B/C/S.

11        Q.   Now this is an entry in the diary of Nenad Davidovic, an officer

12     in the VRS 6th Brigade in Sanski Most, which he authenticated during his

13     testimony as a Defence witness.  And we see here his notes of what he

14     refers to as a command meeting with military officers on the 24th of

15     June, 1992.  Under Colonel Basara's name, we see that he refers to

16     mopping up Hrustovo, Vrhpolje, Sanica, Gornji Budelj, and Donji Budelj,

17     and below that we see details of different units' tasks.  Those are

18     villages in Kljuc and Sanski Most municipalities; right?

19        A.   That's right.

20             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have 65 ter 02826.

21        Q.   Now, this is a 1st Krajina Corps daily combat report from the

22     27th of June, 1992.  Turning to page 2 in the English but still on page 1

23     in the B/C/S at point 3, we read:

24             The mopping up and disarming of what are referred to as

25     paramilitary units in the areas of Kotor Varos, Jajce, Prijedor, Kljuc

Page 37621

 1     and Sanski Most are continuing ...

 2             This is a report on the 27th.  We saw the notes on the 24th

 3     identifying villages in Kljuc and Sanski Most, including Sanica.  I'm

 4     going to put to you that present in Mr. Riedlmayer's formatted entry for

 5     the Sanica mosque but absent from your report is the destruction of the

 6     Sanica mosque on the 26th of June, 1992.

 7             Did you consider the Sanica mosque as having been destroyed

 8     during combat operations or after VRS withdrawal?

 9        A.   You know what?  There are municipalities here.  Does that mean,

10     on the basis of this combat report, that the operations were being

11     carried out in the entire territory of the Sana municipality or just in

12     parts of the territory?

13        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

14        A.   Do you know that?  Sanski Most --

15        Q.   What I asked you was a simple question:  Did you classify the

16     Sanica mosque as destroyed during combat or after VRS withdrawal.  Which

17     is it?

18        A.   I cannot say anything.  I cannot say because there's the question

19     of in which part of Sanski Most is combat being carried out.

20        Q.   Sir, no --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, you classified 10 destructions against 84.

22     What Mr. Traldi wants to know is how you classified this one.  As simple

23     as that.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm saying again Mr. Riedlmayer

25     analysed for each mosque where, what, before, after, so from this

Page 37622

 1     document, it's not possible to say --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, I'm not asking you to comment at this

 3     moment on this document.  How on the basis, as you said, of

 4     Mr. Riedlmayer's information, how did you classify this mosque:  Being

 5     destroyed during combat or after withdrawal?  Because that's what you're

 6     telling us in your report.  Now whether there's a good basis for it or a

 7     bad basis, the first thing we would like to know is under what category

 8     falls this mosque?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the basis of statements by

10     witnesses and the Islamic community gave to Mr. Riedlmayer for his

11     report, but you cannot tell from this report because Sanski Most is a

12     large territory.  I don't know which village had fallen, which didn't --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  You say it is on the basis of Mr. Riedlmayer's

14     information that you were able to classify the 10 against the 84.  The

15     simple question is:  This mosque, was it destroyed during combat or was

16     it destroyed after withdrawal?  This one.  How did you classify it, on

17     whatever basis, but how did you classify it?  Did you classify it under

18     the 10 or under the 84?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Exactly how Riedlmayer classified

20     it, based on statements that he used to write his report.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Fine.  Then I have another question for you.

22     How did you understand Riedlmayer to classify this mosque, during combat

23     or after withdrawal?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would need to read it again.  I

25     just need to find it.  I need to look.

Page 37623

 1             MR. TRALDI:

 2        Q.   Sir, I'm happy to assist.

 3             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have P2510, page 173 in both languages.

 4     We're one page too ...

 5        Q.   So Mr. Riedlmayer's informant statement refers to information in

 6     the records of the Islamic communities.  It says the Sanica mosque was

 7     set on fire on the 26th of June, 1992, and was completely burned out.

 8     All of the sacral objects inside the mosque were looted or burned.  Then

 9     it says the minaret was blown up on the 1st of August, 1992.

10             Where in that paragraph do you find any reference to VRS

11     withdrawal?

12        A.   And where do you find that the VRS was in Sanica at that time?

13        Q.   What I'm putting to you, sir, is that in coming to this

14     conclusion you have essentially made numbers up.  You have no basis for

15     it, and you are providing the Trial Chamber information that you have no

16     basis for providing.  That's the truth; right?

17        A.   No, no.  I'm asking you where --

18        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

19        A.   -- does --

20        Q.   I'm going to stop you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Gojkovic, you're not here to ask any questions

22     to Mr. Traldi.  That's one.  And, second, Mr. Traldi is testing your

23     evidence as we find in your report, and there's no need to ask Mr. Traldi

24     what his position is as to the presence of VRS troops because it's you

25     yourself who classifies the destruction of mosques in either of the two

Page 37624

 1     categories.

 2             Mr. Traldi.

 3             MR. TRALDI:

 4        Q.   Sir, I'm going to turn now to my final topic, your opinion in

 5     your report that the destruction of these cultural sites was an

 6     uncontrolled spate, not part of the chain of command.

 7             So just to make sure I understand your evidence, it's your

 8     evidence that the violence committed against every Muslim and Croat

 9     cultural sites that either you or Mr. Riedlmayer looked at in these 12

10     different municipalities, different areas of Bosnia at different times,

11     was either some sort of grassroots movement of people desecrating mosques

12     and churches or a coincidence; is that right?

13        A.   Precisely.

14        Q.   Did you study the comments of any Bosnian Serb or Serb leaders

15     about mosques and churches during the war?

16        A.   I don't know which leaders you mean.

17        Q.   Sir, at the moment --

18        A.   If you are speaking about --

19        Q.   I've asked a broad question.  Did you study the comments of any

20     Bosnian Serb or Serb leaders about mosques during the war in coming to

21     this purportedly expert conclusion.

22        A.   I personally believe that there was no need for that.  As for

23     these photographs, the way in which buildings were destroyed, and then

24     the time and place where the destruction took place, I think that there

25     is no comment needed by these people.  This is classical spontaneity a

Page 37625

 1     whirlwind.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we again -- you said you personally believed

 3     that there was no need for doing that.  Does this mean that you did not

 4     study, you did not review the comments of any Bosnian Serb or Serb

 5     leaders about mosques during the war?  Is that --

 6             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  -- how we have to understand your answer, that there

 8     was no reason to do that?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All day I talked about this.  I

10     even asked Davidovic, the minister of religion in the government of

11     Republika Srpska, just when the war was coming to an end and after the

12     war, and I asked for some additional information.  He claimed to me that

13     the leadership of the Bosnian Serbs did not take part in this.  And I

14     even brought here a document that he wrote after the destruction of the

15     Ferhadija mosque where he, as minister, addressed the public and

16     condemned this criminal act.  I talked to him for a long time.  Almost an

17     entire day I talked to him about this.  And he even looked at this report

18     of mine that I was writing.  I asked him whether he should add anything

19     to that or whether I should take away anything from that and he said that

20     would be it.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand that you consulted Mr. Davidovic to

22     learn more about the attitude of the Bosnian Serb or Serb leaders.

23             Next question, please, Mr. Traldi.

24             MR. TRALDI:  Could we have 65 ter 32844.

25        Q.   This is an article from the New York Times dated the 21st of

Page 37626

 1     August 1992 titled:  "Serb Gains in Bosnia Create Chaotic Patchwork."

 2     Turning to the bottom of page 2 in both languages, we see a quote from

 3     Simo Drljaca, the chief of police in Prijedor.  He says:

 4             "With their mosques, you must not just break the minarets.

 5     You've got to shake up the foundations because that means they cannot

 6     build another.  Do that, and they'll want to go.  They'll just leave by

 7     themselves."

 8             This is not the sort of statement that you would have considered

 9     in coming to your conclusion that the Bosnian Serb authorities were

10     disconnected from the destruction of mosques, is it?

11        A.   I read this statement, but what are you trying to say with this

12     statement?  A man who was certainly an extremist, he did what he did, are

13     you going to link his statement to the statements made by all the leaders

14     of Republika Srpska; the state, military, and political leaderships?

15        Q.   What I'm going to do, sir, is go through a few examples.  Is it

16     correct from your answer that you did look at this statement, didn't

17     mention it, and concluded based on the conversation you had with

18     Mr. Davidovic that you were going to suggest this wasn't policy.  That's

19     the approach you took as a purported expert; right?

20        A.   No.  If Simo Drljaca was chief of police in Prijedor and if he

21     made this kind of statement, what happened on the ground refuted that.

22     On the ground, there are buildings that were not destroyed in the manner

23     that he described here.  So if he said this, then he is a man who had to

24     go and see all of that, check that, and give orders to carry that out,

25     and that was not carried out at all.

Page 37627

 1        Q.   Sir --

 2        A.   You did not see that and your expert Riedlmayer didn't see that.

 3        Q.   Sir, yet again you're refusing to answer my question.  Is it the

 4     case, yes or no, that you failed to consider statements by actual

 5     authorities and relied on one conversation you had with a gentleman named

 6     Davidovic in coming to this conclusion.  That's the truth; right?

 7        A.   No, no.  I read quite a bit.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, if you say -- and let me re-read your

 9     question:  "Is it the case, yes or no," and then you finish your question

10     by "that's the truth; right," that's not a proper question.

11             MR. TRALDI:  I agree Mr. President.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

13             MR. TRALDI:  I'll rephrase.

14        Q.   Sir, it's correct that whether or not you looked at this

15     statement, you didn't consider it in coming to this conclusion and

16     instead relied on one conversation you had with a person named Davidovic;

17     right?

18        A.   No.  First of all, I relied on Riedlmayer's report on the way in

19     which buildings were destroyed, the ones that I dealt with in detail, and

20     also what they looked like after the demolition, that this had nothing to

21     do with the system, with orders, with carrying out orders.  That is what

22     I am speaking about.  And now you quote Simo Drljaca who says what he

23     says, and the situation on the ground is a direct opposite and that is

24     the point.  And you're not saying anything about that.

25        Q.   So first those two sites that you just said that you dealt with

Page 37628

 1     in detail, those are only two sites - the Ferhadija mosque and Petricevac

 2     church - neither of which come up in Mr. Riedlmayer's report; right?

 3        A.   That's right.

 4        Q.   For the 223 sites that Mr. Riedlmayer analysed, including his

 5     database, all you did was look at pictures of 94 of them; right?

 6        A.   That's right.  Everything that was given to me, everything that

 7     was given to me by the Defence.  I reviewed all of that.  All the

 8     photographs.  And I lost quite a bit of time there.  There are some

 9     things there that are unimportant, but I went that you that as well.

10        Q.   Sir --

11        A.   And I was --

12        Q.   Focusing on the loss of time, you agree there were hundreds of

13     mosques and Catholic churches in the 1st Krajina Corps's area in 1992;

14     right?

15        A.   That's right.

16        Q.   And I notice from your analysis of the Ferhadija mosque and the

17     Petricevac church, that in your view to demolish the sites properly would

18     have taken multiple days of preparation.  You recall giving that evidence

19     in your report; right?

20        A.   That's right.

21        Q.   Now with a war on, it might well be the case that there were more

22     pressing things for an engineering unit to be doing than spending two or

23     three days looking at the plans of a building that it was going to

24     demolish; right?

25        A.   That's just an assumption.  Don't drag me into that.  That's not

Page 37629

 1     fair.  We never dreamed of such things.

 2        Q.   So what I'm testing, sir, is the basis --

 3        A.   I would not destroy buildings of my soldiers.  Do you think that

 4     I as commander would be destroying the buildings of soldiers who are

 5     waging war together with me?  Does that seem logical to you?

 6        Q.   Sir, I'm going to stop you.

 7        A.   Do you --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  We're not talking about logic, at least not any

 9     logic which is not within your realm of expertise, and we are talking

10     about the facts.  Would you refrain from putting questions and would you,

11     rather, answer the questions.

12             And would you also, Mr. Traldi, focus very much on -- to avoid

13     composite questions, because it started all with what the witness had

14     considered as far as statements of leaders are concerned.  We still do

15     not know whether he considered -- whether he was aware of and considered

16     the statement as reported to have been given by Mr. Drljaca in a US

17     newspaper.

18             Did you know of that statement of Mr. Drljaca and have you

19     considered it, Witness?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I knew of it.  I knew of it.  I

21     read it.  But as for this expertise that I carried out, I found it to be

22     unimportant related to the situation as it was on the ground after his

23     statement was made.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  You considered it not of such relevance to include

25     it in your report but you were aware of it.

Page 37630

 1             Mr. Traldi, perhaps -- you announced more or less that you would

 2     have another few statements or --

 3             MR. TRALDI:  I did.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  -- to be put to the witness.  I leave it in your

 5     hands to proceed as you consider wise.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  I'll just ask one follow-up question.  I know we're

 7     close to the time for the break, but perhaps I'll suggest to Mr. Lukic

 8     that we could agree on a couple of them during the break and save time.

 9        Q.   Sir, based on your analyses of the Pribicevac and Ferhadija sites

10     and the hundreds of mosques and churches in the 1st Krajina Corps's area

11     of responsibility, it's correct that to destroy those in the way that you

12     suggest could have required a thousand or more days of time from various

13     units in 1992 when they also had other tasks.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  That's again a very composite question, Mr. Traldi.

15     Could you try not to put everything together.  First, it's about the

16     number of days needed to do it.  And then the other matter is the next

17     question, then, I take it.

18             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, Your Honour.  Though I've already asked both of

19     those separately, and so the -- the total produced by the witness's

20     previous answer -- previous answers is a significant amount of time.

21     What I'm putting to him is that's a significant amount of time that would

22     have been hard for the VRS to spend in 1992.

23        Q.   That's the truth; right?

24        A.   If we were to take an assumption because we were not the Army of

25     North Korea or Boko Haram.  I did not have problems like that, that

Page 37631

 1     somebody would force me to commit such a criminal act.  I claim that no

 2     one could have done that, not General Talic, not anybody else.  But I

 3     will tell you one thing:  In the engineering regiment, I had a unit, a

 4     battalion of pioneers, about 600 men, and they were only mining and

 5     de-mining.  Also, I had another pioneer battalion, same manpower, and

 6     they were only supposed to demolish tunnels, bridges, and so on.

 7     Military facilities, that is.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, unfortunately again you're not responding

 9     to the question.  One simple question:  If you would have wished - I'm

10     not saying that anyone wished that - but if you would have wished to

11     destroy the churches and mosques within the area of responsibility of the

12     1st Krajina Corps, would that have taken considerable time if you would

13     have used the methods as were prescribed in the JNA?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had to do that?  The first thing

15     I would do, I would go to see all these buildings.  I would carry out a

16     detailed analysis, and --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, doing all that, would that have taken up to

18     a thousand working days?  If would you wish to do it --

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  -- how many days would it have taken?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, a lot less because many

22     buildings could have been demolished mechanically.  In relation to that,

23     there were public utility companies in different municipalities that

24     could have been involved in such tasks, so you really could have reduced

25     the time needed.  I was just speaking of a particular --

Page 37632

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, if you would have wished to blowup in the

 2     professional way as prescribed in the JNA instructions all of the

 3     churches and the mosques in the area of responsibility of the 1st Krajina

 4     Corps, how many days would have that taken?  I'm not talking alternative

 5     ways of destroying them but if you had wished to blow them up in

 6     accordance with the rules.  How many days would that have taken?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Are we talking about 100 buildings

 8     or how many or just these, the ones that Mr. Riedlmayer included in his

 9     report?  Or all the --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, could you assist me in a number given by

11     Mr. Riedlmayer?

12             MR. TRALDI:  Well, actually, so, what I'd been putting was all

13     mosques and Catholic churches in the 1st Krajina Corps's area, so that's

14     beyond the report.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  And that would be what number, approximately?

16             MR. TRALDI:  Several hundred.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Several hundred.  Let's make it 300.  If you want to

18     blow up 300 churches --

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One month, maximum.  One month,

20     maximum.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  How many working days of soldiers?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Up to one month at the most,

23     maximum, given the forces that I had; that is to say, not to involve

24     civil engineering from civilian structures.  If they were to be involved,

25     then the time would be a lot less.

Page 37633

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  With your people you would do ten a day.  Is that --

 2     if you wished to do that properly?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Even more.  Even more.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Even more.

 5             MR. TRALDI:

 6        Q.   And what it would require for each site was the people to be

 7     involved to spend two or three days figuring out how to best do it;

 8     right?  Set aside the total amount of time to get the job done with all

 9     the people for each site would require the people involved to spend two

10     or three days to do it; right?

11        A.   Well, you see, during war time, as for documentation and looking

12     at facilities -- I mean, everything was different.  So that time would be

13     a lot shorter.  That would be no problem whatsoever.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  We will have to take a break, Mr. Traldi.

15             Witness, you're invited to follow the usher.  We'd like to see

16     you back in 20 minutes.

17                           [The witness stands down]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, could you give us an impression as far

19     as timing is concerned?

20             MR. TRALDI:  I expect to finish before the end of the day

21     regardless of whether we can agree on two of the other statements.  And

22     if I might just tender, so I don't forget, the two documents that I used

23     but have not yet tendered.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Registrar.

25             MR. TRALDI:  That's 65 ter 02826 and 32844.  And there's also a

Page 37634

 1     page from Mr. Davidovic's diary.  I'm in the Chamber's hands whether we

 2     should admit the page separately from the parts that have already come in

 3     or add it to P7418, which is the current selection.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, any preferences in relation to the last

 5     question?

 6             MR. LUKIC:  Whatever my colleague deems --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I think it's clearly on the record where it comes

 8     from; therefore, I think it could be added to the selection.

 9             MR. TRALDI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Traldi, you're not doing anything with 19777?

11             MR. TRALDI:  That's the page from Mr. Davidovic's diary.  Thank

12     you, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter 2826 shall be assigned Exhibit P7495.  And

15     32844 shall be assigned Exhibit P7496.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  P7495 and P7496 are admitted into evidence.

17             We resume at 2.00.

18                           --- Recess taken at 1.40 p.m.

19                           --- On resuming at 2.00 p.m.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, anything to report?

21             MR. TRALDI:  Mr. Lukic has asked me to show the two documents in

22     question, so I'll be very efficient.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I need a couple of minutes at the end of this

24     session as well.  I'm -- we might go five or seven minutes, then, over

25     the time if you are strictly adhering to the five minutes.  And I ask the

Page 37635

 1     booth whether this would be a major problem for them.  It's an urgent

 2     matter which I have to deal with.

 3                           [The witness takes the stand]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I see that there's no -- at least no strong

 5     opposition from the booth and it's, as always, highly appreciated.

 6             Mr. Traldi.

 7             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have 65 ter 32856.

 8        Q.   Now this is part of a publication called Zapadna Srbija.  We see

 9     it's published by the Serb Radical Party of Republika Srpska and

10     Republika Srpska Krajina.  That's a nationalist party; right?

11        A.   If you say so, then yes.

12             MR. TRALDI:  Can we turn to page 2 in the B/C/S.

13        Q.   And we see and we've got in the bottom in the English and the

14     bottom right in the B/C/S a cartoon of a mosque with an exploding minaret

15     labelled "Castration of Islam."

16             I'm going to show you one more example and then I'll have one

17     quick question.

18             MR. TRALDI:  Can we have 65 ter 32857.

19        Q.   All right.  And this is another part of an issue of the same

20     publication.

21             MR. TRALDI:  If we could have page 3 in the B/C/S only.

22        Q.   And what we see at the bottom, you see a cartoon of a man with a

23     broom standing in front of an Orthodox church sweeping away buildings

24     with minarets on them; right?  You see that, sir?

25        A.   I do.

Page 37636

 1        Q.   You didn't study publications by Serb nationalist parties in

 2     preparation for your report either, did you?

 3        A.   I didn't now and I did not do it before, no.

 4             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 32856 and 32857.

 5             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  When were these cartoons published?

 6             MR. TRALDI:  Both during the war; one in 1993, one in 1994.  My

 7     notes say the first one in 1994 and the second in 1993.

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  32856 shall be assigned Exhibit P7497.  And 32857

11     shall be assigned Exhibit P7498.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  P7497 and P7498 are admitted.

13             MR. TRALDI:

14        Q.   Finally, sir, the Chamber has received evidence in relation to

15     specific mosques of both President Karadzic and General Mladic

16     encouraging the destruction of mosques or saying, in Mladic's case,

17     that:  "A mosque with two minarets in the Tesanj area couldn't be left

18     standing."  You didn't study their statements in preparing your report

19     either, did you?

20             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honours, we object to this type of questions.

21     It's too broad and the witness should know who, when, what was said.

22     This is --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, did you -- the objection is denied,

24     Mr. Lukic.

25             The -- did you review any report as suggested by Mr. Traldi; that

Page 37637

 1     is --

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.  And I wasn't interested in

 3     that either.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you.

 5             MR. TRALDI:  That completes my questions for this witness.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Traldi.

 7             Mr. Lukic, may I take it that you want to re-examine the witness.

 8     And perhaps we should not start with it today.  Could you give us an

 9     indication as to how much time you would need tomorrow for that?

10             MR. LUKIC:  I hope that I can finish in maybe a bit more than

11     half an hour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Bit more than a half an hour.

13                           Questioned by the Court:

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I'd like to deal with another matter briefly.

15             Witness, could I ask you:  You drafted the report and you gave

16     that to the Defence, did you?

17        A.   That's correct.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you prepare the text on a computer and did you

19     add the photographs to it?

20        A.   I did, and I did have a computer.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And you yourself inserted the photographs in

22     your report so that the entirety of the report, was that what you

23     delivered to the Defence?

24        A.   Yes, although I did have some additional things that I wanted to

25     look at.  However, the pressure was such I had to submit it urgently, so

Page 37638

 1     because of the time restraints I wasn't able to.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If would you please focus on my questions.

 3             So you delivered or sent the -- your report, including all the

 4     annexes, as one document to the Defence or was it split up?

 5        A.   No.  I contacted them, and then I took the parts from

 6     Riedlmayer's report that I thought I would need, and then I put it all

 7     together and sent it to the Defence.  I tried to round it off and make a

 8     whole of it.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10        A.   Perhaps -- excuse me.  Perhaps I didn't cite that things were

11     from Riedlmayer's report, but that is understood.  It's implied.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm mainly interested in this moment in the

13     integrity of the report.  You sent it as one report to the Defence?

14        A.   That's correct.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  When did you do that?

16        A.   I think the lawyer, Mr. Lukic, has that information.  I really --

17     I really don't know.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm asking you.  Because if you sent it from your

19     computer, it might still be somewhere in your "sent" box.

20        A.   No, no.  I submitted it to the Defence team in Banja Luka.  I

21     submitted the complete document in printed form, and I also submitted it

22     on a USB, and then they sent it to the Defence team.  I didn't send it

23     directly myself.  And I have here -- the person who received the

24     documents, I have his signature here that I presented -- I submitted

25     such-and-such a document to him.  This is the person who works in

Page 37639

 1     Banja Luka for the Defence team headed by Mr. Lukic.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you give us the name of the person that

 3     received the hard copy and the electronic version.  Who was that?

 4        A.   It was Mikajlo Mitrovic.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  And do you remember -- can you see that from the

 6     signature on what date it was delivered?

 7        A.   2nd of February, 2015.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Did you ever receive it back or did you

 9     receive any comments on the report as you had given it to -- in

10     Banja Luka to Mr. Mitrovic, I think you said?  Yes.

11        A.   No.  No, I didn't know any of this until the Registry got in

12     touch with me.  About five days ago, perhaps.  I didn't even know when I

13     would testify.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Had you delivered previous versions of your

15     report before February 2015?

16        A.   Because Mitrovic asked me if I had done anything, I would submit

17     things to him, but I told him that it wasn't finished.  That's correct.

18     I sent him an electronic version of parts of the report, and then the

19     pressure was on to complete it.  There wasn't enough time, simply.  I am

20     not in a position, in the material sense, to be able to do things like

21     this, especially not --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm mainly seeking to establish what happened rather

23     than why it happened.

24             Those parts you had sent or had given to Mr. Mitrovic, did you

25     ever at a later time change those parts or did they remain untouched by

Page 37640

 1     you?

 2        A.   Perhaps something was changed.  Perhaps.  When I provided

 3     Mitrovic with an integral hard copy version.  Perhaps something was

 4     changed.  It's possible.  I can't remember exactly what, but it's

 5     possible.  I worked on it and I knew that I would be coming here, so I

 6     continued studying some material.  It's possible that something was

 7     added.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But was it added after you had given it in

 9     hard copy and in electronic form in February to the Defence or ...?

10        A.   No.  After the 2nd of February, 2015, I did not change anything.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Was the content ever discussed with the Defence on

12     the basis of the final version or the previous versions that were given

13     in part to the Defence?

14        A.   No.  No, I sent it.  I think Mitrovic looked at something.  I

15     asked him that we look at it in more detail together, because I was doing

16     a specific type of work in that case, but he said he didn't have any

17     remarks to make, and I said all right.  Other than the written -- the

18     task that was written out of what I was supposed to do from Mr. Lukic, I

19     had a lot of trouble how to round it off, how to present it.  It's not

20     easy with 100 demolished mosques.  You get a little bit -- you're a bit

21     stumped.  You don't know how to deal with that.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Now I'm taking you back to the issue that you were

23     questioned about earlier; that is, about the Carsijska Dzamija Srebrenica

24     municipality mosque.  You remember that we had -- in the B/C/S we had

25     four photographs.  You remember?  One on top, one below it, and then two.

Page 37641

 1     Do you have any recollection --

 2             Mr. Lukic.

 3             MR. LUKIC:  Maybe the witness should take off his headphones.  I

 4     checked that with my Case Manager.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you take off -- first of all, do you

 6     understand the English language?  Could you take off --

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- your earphones for a second.

 9             MR. LUKIC:  Everything went through our Case Manager.  I really

10     met this gentleman only once in Banja Luka in 2014, and the first time I

11     saw him again when he came here to The Hague.  Our Case Manager said that

12     he was receiving some additions later, and originally there were only

13     three pictures, as in English.  That's why we have English version with

14     three pictures.  Not four.  Later on the fourth one was added, and that's

15     why we have fourth one in B/C/S, but everything else should be the

16     same --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

18             MR. LUKIC:  -- so that's not CLSS's mistake either.

19     [Overlapping speakers]... we --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  That's at least good to know.  And if you leave it

21     to me for a second.

22             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you put on your earphones again.  And could we

24     have the relevant page?

25             Mr. Traldi, you certainly will have the -- I may find it easily,

Page 37642

 1     but --

 2             MR. TRALDI:  Which report, Your Honour?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  It's the English report --

 4             MR. TRALDI:  Of this witness?

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No, it's the --

 6             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It's D1183.

 7             MR. TRALDI:  Then I think it's page 149.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  149, yes.  Could we have that on our screen.

 9             That seems not to be the right page in --

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Wasn't it 142?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  It's 142 in the B/C/S.  There we are.

12             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, I'm sorry.  I'd given the English page number,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now we can do with this one only.

15             You see the -- in the B/C/S version that is on the left -- it

16     must be on your screen.  You see the second photograph without any

17     subtitle?  You see that one?

18        A.   That's right.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, Witness, you earlier told us that three

20     pictures were good enough and that you didn't need the fourth one.  Is

21     that still your testimony?

22        A.   Well, let me tell you.  When I looked at it, I thought that I had

23     kept it out.  And now that I see this photograph, I find that to be of

24     interest to me too.  And underneath the photographs, the last ones, I

25     wrote:  "Photographs of the demolished mosque."  So the first one, second

Page 37643

 1     one, and third one - or, rather, the last three - are photographs of the

 2     demolished mosque.  I'm not hiding anything here, but I assume since --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, I'm not saying that you're hiding anything.

 4     I'm just asking you whether this photograph, whether you left it out at a

 5     certain point in time because you considered it not that important, as

 6     you testified, or was it at any time that you added this third photograph

 7     in your report?

 8        A.   No, no.  I included that photograph in my report.  I included

 9     that photograph in my report.  But when it was displayed to me on the

10     screen here, this page without that photograph, I thought that I had left

11     it out and that's why I gave that comment.  But I find it to be of great

12     interest, because you see buildings around it, you see the landscape, you

13     see where the mosque was destroyed.  You can see all of that precisely in

14     that photograph.  The hill above it and so on.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  So where you earlier testified that you considered

16     it not that relevant and you could do without, you're now testifying that

17     it's very interesting and that's the reason why it is there, in your

18     report?

19        A.   Yes.  But I stated that at the moment when I did not see it in my

20     report here; that is to say, I didn't know about the content.  It's not

21     that I put it in here just like that for no reason whatsoever.  However,

22     when they displayed this to me for the first time, it wasn't there, the

23     photograph, and that is perhaps why I thought that it was not relevant,

24     but actually I did insert it as relevant.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  When did you insert it?  Was it already in the

Page 37644

 1     previous versions, the partly versions, or did you include it at any

 2     other point in time?

 3        A.   The first version of the report.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  It was there already, the first version, which you

 5     partly gave to the Defence?

 6        A.   That's right, that's right.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  One additional question.

 9             You have a hard copy of your report in the Serbian language in

10     front of you; correct?

11        A.   That's right.

12             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I'm referring to the piece in front of you in

13     paper.  Page 142, does that contain three or four photographs?  Not on

14     the screen, but --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  In the hard copy.

16             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  -- in paper, in front of you.  What you have on

17     your desk.

18        A.   All right.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Please open page 142.

20        A.   This?

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Yes, indeed.  We see the witness is showing the

22     page with four photographs, including the photograph in question.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  And to your recollection, did you deliver ever any

24     preliminary version, one of the early versions, with three photographs

25     only?

Page 37645

 1        A.   I cannot say.  I don't think so.  Maybe it was submitted -- no, I

 2     don't believe that.  No.  But I cannot say with certainty.  I mean,

 3     probably they wouldn't have made a mistake or the Registry.  Maybe the

 4     mistake is mine.  Possibly.  I'm not sure.  I cannot say.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm not talking about mistakes.  I'm trying to

 6     reconstruct what happened.

 7             Do you have any recollection of adding a fourth photograph to

 8     that page?

 9        A.   No, no.  No.  Actually, I have the memory stick at the hotel, so

10     I can bring it for you tomorrow, and I didn't change anything there.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  A memory stick of the final version you gave to the

12     Defence?

13        A.   No, I mean this part related to Riedlmayer and these photographs.

14     I mean, really, nothing was changed there.  From day one when I started

15     working on this, I never changed anything there.  Now whether somebody

16     when printing it -- I don't know.  Maybe -- well, I don't understand how

17     come.  How that came out.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Judge Moloto has one more question for you.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Do you have any recollection of you removing this

20     middle picture from the B/C/S version that you ever had, whether it is on

21     the memory stick or on paper?

22        A.   You know what the only thing might be here --

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  No.

24        A.   -- I printed it -- I actually took the memory stick to the

25     printers, and now on one computer, you have photographs that are placed

Page 37646

 1     as they should be, and then on the other one, there are changes.  And

 2     then maybe the person who was printing this did not include this.  That's

 3     possible.  You know, it's a different programme.  So quite simply the

 4     picture, the image, may go missing.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I understand that somebody might have done

 6     something.  What I'm asking you is whether do you remember at all at any

 7     time you yourself removing this picture from the B/C/S version?  Thank

 8     you so much.  I believe when you shake your head, you mean no.

 9        A.   No.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I leave it to this.

12             Witness, there'll be a short time we would need you tomorrow

13     morning.  I again instruct you not to speak with anyone or to communicate

14     in whatever way with whomever about your testimony, whether already given

15     or still to be given tomorrow.  You may follow the usher, and we'd like

16     to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.30.

17                           [The witness stands down]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, whatever the explanation may be and

19     whatever versions there may have existed, what apparently happened,

20     that's at least what the CLSS is reporting to us, is that the same page

21     in B/C/S with three photographs was submitted in November 2014 for

22     translation and was accurately translated.  And then --

23             MR. LUKIC:  That's what I was told by my Case Manager as well.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's fine.  But we should have heard that

25     from you immediately without any delay, because what you actually did is

Page 37647

 1     you uploaded an original which is not consistent with the translation and

 2     that's something that should not happen.  It creates all kind of

 3     confusion.

 4             Again, I'm not talking about your knowledge or -- I'm talking

 5     about the Defence creating such a situation which the Defence should have

 6     prevented to happen.  I leave it to that for the time being.

 7             MR. LUKIC:  I already told Your Honour that I was not aware of

 8     the difference at all.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's the reason why I phrased it as I did.

10     At the same time, of course, Mr. Lukic, lead counsel bears a certain

11     responsibility even if things happen -- I say "a certain responsibility,"

12     but if it would be the very first sloppy thing in this case, then we

13     might have considered it less serious as we still do it.  There should be

14     no different versions sent for translation.

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  One additional comment.  It's important to know

16     which version was uploaded, which version was disclosed to the

17     Prosecution and is available for the Chamber.

18             MR. LUKIC:  I will check it [Overlapping speakers] --

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  We have to know that before we decide on

20     admission or how to --

21             MR. LUKIC:  We have to deal with it -- through the whole document

22     now.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And what the Chamber also would like to be

24     done is -- we were seeking the intervention of VWS and ask the witness

25     whether he would be willing to deliver the memory stick and the versions

Page 37648

 1     he has in his possession so that at least verification of what happened

 2     is still possible.

 3             MR. LUKIC:  As I understood him, he is willing to disclose it to

 4     the Chamber.  I cannot check with him anymore.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  You cannot check with him anymore.  Therefore, I am

 6     asking for the intervention of the Registry and the Victims and Witness

 7     Section.

 8             We adjourn for the day, and with gratitude to all those who

 9     allowed us to continue for more than 15 minutes today.  We adjourn for

10     the day and we'll resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the 12th of August, 9.30 in

11     the morning, in this same courtroom, I.

12                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.34 p.m.,

13                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 12th day of

14                           August, 2015, at 9.30 a.m.