1 Thursday, 17 December 2015
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
9 IT-09-92-T, The Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 We're waiting for the witness to be escorted into the courtroom.
12 I meanwhile use the time for the following matter. It's a withdrawal of
13 Defence motions.
14 On the 8th of December of this year, the Defence filed a motion
15 withdrawing its motions for admission of the evidence of Jojin Kljecanin,
16 Bozo Davidovic, Bogoljub Kos, and Dragisa Serdar. In light of the
17 Defence`s withdrawal of the evidence of Serdar and Davidovic, the Chamber
18 hereby clarifies that D1276 and D1241 are marked not admitted.
19 Could even deal briefly with another matter. It's about an
20 exhibit number.
21 During the number of Milos Kovac on 1st December document bearing
22 65 ter number 03797 was assigned to Exhibit P7741.
23 [The witness takes the stand]
24 JUDGE ORIE: However, the Registry attached the document to
25 document P7742, and the Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to reassign
1 Rule 65 ter number 03797 to P7741 in e-court.
2 Good morning, Mr. Pavlovic.
3 THE WITNESS: Morning.
4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll continue to hear your evidence, but I'd like
5 to remind you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've
6 given at the beginning of your testimony.
7 Mr. Lukic. And could I also inquire with the parties whether a
8 time arrangement has been made.
9 MR. LUKIC: Not that we discussed, but I'll adjust.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
11 Yes, Mr. MacDonald.
12 MR. MacDONALD: Just to put on the record, Your Honours, with
13 regard to the lists sent by the Defence yesterday morning, the
14 Prosecution has reviewed and would agree to eight documents which we've
15 sent to Mr. Lukic that can come in without Mr. Lukic having to go over
16 them with the witness.
17 We received a new list this morning with some additions it seems
18 and we will review that as well and come back as quickly as possible.
19 JUDGE ORIE: That's hereby on the record.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. LUKIC: I would read and I provided Your Honours with the
22 list as well, and the Registrar. I don't know if you were given the
23 list. If you have it in front of you --
24 JUDGE ORIE: I have a list before me at this moment.
25 MR. LUKIC: This is the tool to speed up, and it's -- it's mostly
1 dealing with the second part of that breakthrough after Nova Kasaba,
2 until that column reached the territory under control of AB and H.
3 And I would open only three documents to summarise. It's those
4 three documents on the second page, and then I will move to burials and
6 So just to have it on the record, I'll read the numbers, and on
7 the list you have footnotes from the analysis of Mr. Pavlovic, so we'll
8 propose to be admitted: 1D05879. We will ask to be marked for
9 identification since it lacks translation 1D06272. Also to be marked for
10 identification, 1D06273 and 1D06274.
11 The following documents are translated and we would tender them
12 into the evidence, and they are: 1D05083, 1D07247, 1D06275, 1D06259.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't seem to have those figures which starts
14 with a seven on my list.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I don't know whether -- you provided us with an
16 earlier list or whether the new list is there as well.
17 MR. LUKIC: I don't have any starting with 7.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, you said 07.
19 MR. LUKIC: It's -- let me check. It's 1D06247.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, I'm at 1D06274, not 47.
21 MR. LUKIC: Under two rows below, you have this one.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: 624 -- yes, that I see.
23 Can you say your numbers against, please.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could we ...
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, apparently you have a list. Could you
2 provide it such a way that we can check that during the break so as --
3 MR. LUKIC: Yeah, that's the list you have in front of you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you -- you read a few numbers out of that
5 list, and there are not very much in a -- in an order which made it easy
6 for us to find them. If you write down just the numbers, I think there
7 were some six or eight, write them down, if you have them, give them to
8 Mr. Registrar. He'll either copy it or give it to us so that we can
9 check it on our list.
10 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry if I misspoke. That's the list we have in
11 front of us. There's nothing else.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I have a list consisting of three pages --
13 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
15 JUDGE ORIE: I think --
16 MR. LUKIC: Just entered them from the transcript.
17 JUDGE ORIE: With the help of Mr. Registrar, I think we'll
18 resolve that. Let's -- let's -- let's first hear your questions and the
19 answers. And the one you mentioned are the ones not opposed, not
20 objected to by the Prosecution.
21 MR. MacDONALD: When Mr. Lukic began reading there were some that
22 we didn't oppose, the MFI ones obviously. But this other list that we
23 got this morning, I'm not sure if Your Honours have it, there are more
24 documents, so ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: I have one list consisting of three pages and
1 whether that dates from yesterday or from today I wouldn't know, because
2 there's no date on it.
3 MR. MacDONALD: Your Honour, I wonder if I might suggest,
4 Mr. Lukic has from e-mail from us the ones that we do not object to from
5 yesterday, from the list from yesterday morning and, thereafter, we can
6 discuss this new list and we can put it to Your Honours in written form.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Let's do that and let's try to resolve it and not
8 use court time for it.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
10 MR. LUKIC: Should I read the rest of the numbers so the
11 Prosecution knows exactly ... I'm afraid there might be some confusion.
12 It will take two minutes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: There is -- take you two minutes. It's your time,
14 Mr. Lukic.
15 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
16 So the next one is 1D06275; then 1D06259; the next one 1D06264;
17 next, 1D05888; next, 1D05889; next 1D06276; next, 1D06277; next, 1D06279
18 for identification, lacking translation; next, 1D06250 for
19 identification, lacking translation; next, 1D06281 for identification,
20 lacking translation; and the last one, 1D06282 for identification,
21 lacking translation.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Now we've got your list. Of course, we don't know
23 which ones are objected to. We'll hear that from the Prosecution later.
24 Further, I see "Statement of," sometimes given to whom, sometimes not
25 given to whom, so we do not know whether that's a statement prepared for
1 ICTY purposes or not --
2 MR. LUKIC: There is not a single one on this list prepared by
3 the ICTY.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's at least may remove any concerns about
5 Rule 92.
6 MR. LUKIC: Bis or ter, yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Bis or ter. Please proceed, for the time being.
8 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Next I would call up to see
9 it on our screens, 1D05890.
10 MR. MacDONALD: Um, sorry to interrupt. Your Honours, I wonder
11 if we can go into private session for a moment.
12 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
13 [Private session]
11 Page 42812 redacted. Private session.
22 [Open session]
23 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
25 WITNESS: DUSAN PAVLOVIC [Resumed]
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 Examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]
3 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, we can see that Lieutenant Selim
4 Oriz [phoen] on 26th of July, 1995 gave a statement. I'll just going to
5 show the last statement to you in order to speed things up although
6 perhaps we should have seen some other excerpts. We need to look at page
7 67 in the B/C/S and page 11 in the English version?
8 JUDGE ORIE: As far as I can ...
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Fourth paragraph from the bottom, it states: "In my opinion, we
11 had our biggest losses in the Kamenica sector, when the column was cut
12 off, and after that, panic among the combatants increased. I think much
13 more could have been done in that respect, that we did not listen to
14 those who came after us."
15 And the last sentence in the document states: "I estimate that
16 we lost at least 4 to 5.000 able-bodied men."
17 I would like to show you another document now, 1D06280. It's a
18 section of the transcript during the testimony of Mr. Butler in the case
19 against General Tolimir.
20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need to look at e-court page 67.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all extra
22 microphones be switched off, please.
23 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
24 MR. LUKIC: Then we should go to private session.
25 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
1 [Private session]
11 Page 42816 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 THE REGISTRAR: We're now in open session, Your Honours.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 MR. LUKIC: Can we shortly see 1D06281.
8 Q. [Interpretation] We're looking at the book by Mr. Carl Bildt.
9 [In English] [Previous translation continues] ... seek to see page 88 in
10 e-court. It's page 66 of the book.
11 [Interpretation] In his book, Mr. Bildt, as we can see on page 66
12 of the book states the following: "[In English] And probably more than
13 4.000 people had lost their lives in a week of brutal ambushes and
14 fighting in the forests, by the roadside and in the valleys between
15 Srebrenica and the Tuzla district, as the column was trying to reach
17 [Interpretation] Do you know where Mr. Bildt was in 1994, 1995?
18 A. At the point in time when the events in Srebrenica were unfolding
19 in July 1995, Mr. Bildt, as far as I know, was the special peace envoy of
20 the European Union to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Of course, the reason why
21 I took his opinion as a reference point was because at that position he
22 had insight into information -- intelligence data from the field from
23 international representatives in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and he wrote
24 that later in his book.
25 Q. Do you know what were his other positions in Bosnia?
1 A. Immediately after this period, he became the High Representative
2 in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
3 Q. Did he participate in some conferences?
4 A. Yes. In particular, the Dayton Peace Conference. I think he
5 took part there. In any case, he was someone who was well-informed in
6 terms of intelligence and what was going on in the field, and he was at
7 the highest level.
8 MR. LUKIC: We would just propose into evidence cover page and
9 this page, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Before we do so, a line before there it reads:
11 "In five days of massacres, Mladic had arranged for the methodical
12 execution of more than 3.000 men who had stayed behind and become
13 prisoners of war."
14 Is that something you gave authority to as well or just the
15 yellow line -- the yellow highlighted portion? Because you explained how
16 well-informed he was, so I'm wondering whether it's limited to the yellow
17 portion or whether you would also rely on the other part I just read.
18 Could you please answer my question.
19 THE WITNESS: Oh, sorry. I --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
21 THE WITNESS: I -- [Interpretation] I thought the question was
22 for the Defence counsel.
23 I quoted this part from his book regarding the circumstances I
24 was dealing with and that is what I was discussing.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please answer now my question. The
1 question was whether you gave some authority to the knowledge and the
2 ability of Mr. Bildt to know what had happened, whether you then also
3 accept the previous few lines where he concluded, as I read, that Mladic
4 had arranged for the methodical execution of more than 3.000 men who had
5 stayed behind.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I were tasked to deal with that
7 particular portion, I would have to go through the same process when I
8 analysed the losses during the breakthrough. I would have to collate all
9 the relevant document, analyse them, put them in order in order to
10 produce conclusions, which would require months, if not years, much as I
11 did for my own analysis. I did not make conclusions based on a sole
12 piece of information or document. We know what analytical work entails.
13 Many documents, their cross-referencing, their analysis, and collation.
14 As you could see, I took a large number into -- of documents into
15 account. Perhaps I could have included more, if that was a problem.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But I did refer to the entire book.
18 I did not try to steer clear of anything, in particular.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No, that again was not my question. But the
20 authority of Mr. Bildt in this respect, you say, I would have to verify
21 that, and you didn't verify that on the others although, in general
22 terms, you accept Mr. Bildt as someone who was knowledgeable about the
24 Is that how I have to understand your testimony?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because I was busy with the losses
1 of the 28th Division sustained during the breakthrough. This is just one
2 of many documents that I tried to cross-reference.
3 JUDGE ORIE: You're evading an answer to my question. Whether
4 you accept the authority of Mr. Bildt as such and whether you would
5 accept it on a similar level for the previous lines. Not to say that he
6 is necessarily right or wrong, but you praised his knowledgeability and
7 whether that would -- if there's any reason not to accept that for the
8 previous lines.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: And, incidentally, that sentence that Judge Orie
10 read also relates to losses during the same period in the same area.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps I may be of assistance. I
12 did mention what Mr. Bildt's position at the time was. He had access to
13 intelligence information for everything. However, I cannot comment upon
14 the previous sentence because I did not include it in my analysis. As
15 for the segment I was tasked with, I said, yes, he was in that position
16 and he had access to information.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I asked you whether that would be any less
18 true for the previous sentence. I'm not -- I didn't ask you whether you
19 agreed with him but whether there's any reason to less or even more
20 accept his knowledge, his ability, to know what had happened in relation
21 to the previous few lines.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think I've answered, but I will
23 repeat. In order for me to comment on any part of his book, I have to
24 put together many documents concerning the topic, and I have to analyse
25 them in order to produce some kind of assessment.
1 As for the highlighted part, did I that, but I did not do that
2 for the previous sentence. Otherwise, it would have been unprofessional,
3 if I had done that. I cannot say if it is correct or not.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I hope you understand my point of
7 JUDGE ORIE: I fully understand. I didn't even ask you whether
8 it was correct or not. I asked you whether the same praising of his
9 knowledgeability, whether there's any reason to believe that he was less
10 knowledgeable on the part on the previous sentence, in view of his
11 position, his access to intelligence, all the reasons you mentioned
12 answering Mr. Lukic's questions, whether you -- there's any reason that
13 you would give him less authority on other parts of the book.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said he had access to information
15 in keeping with his position. That is not in dispute. It is as it is.
16 What I did say was that I cannot comment on the previous part because I
17 did not deal with it.
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- he did have information, though.
20 JUDGE ORIE: He was just as well-informed on any matter, not just
21 the lines you focussed on. Is that --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. LUKIC: Only I would comment on this, Your Honour. Now, you
1 are seeking the opinion of this witness on something he didn't deal and
2 did you not permit to us seek his opinion on something he dealt with. I
3 just want it on the record.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, first of all, you're not supposed to
5 comment on what I asked. You asked questions to this witness about the
6 background of Mr. Bildt, his access to information and his
7 knowledgeability. And that was put in general terms, not exclusively in
8 relation to that. The questions what was his position did he have -- I
9 asked whether there's any reason to believe that he would have been less
10 knowledgeable on a portion of the book on which you did not focus but
11 which I read to him, and I only did so after you had tendered the
12 document. So I let -- I allowed you to ask all questions you wished to
13 put to the witness. It was only when you tendered it that I asked this
14 additional question.
15 Mr. Registrar, the number for the book would be ... for the
16 excerpt of the book.
17 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D1396, Your Honours.
18 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, Your Honour. We were just hoping that the
19 date of the book could come in as well. It's on page 5 [Overlapping
21 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if you can agree on it, then we don't need
22 page 5.
23 MR. MacDONALD: Oh.
24 JUDGE ORIE: What's the year when the book was published?
25 MR. MacDONALD: It's 1998 from our reading, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: 1998. No objections. Admitted into evidence.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. LUKIC: Thank you. Can I consult with the client for a
5 JUDGE ORIE: You can do so if he sticks to our rule that he
6 should not speak at audible volume.
7 [Defence counsel confer]
8 JUDGE ORIE: I can hear Mr. Mladic's voice so ...
9 No speaking aloud, Mr. Mladic. Last warning.
10 Mr. Lukic, please proceed.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Do you know anything about the meeting between Mr. Mladic and
14 Mr. Bildt when they met in Dobanovci on the 14th of July, 1995 around the
15 time when everything was going on?
16 A. I read hundreds of thousands of documents when I analysed all of
17 it. Colloquially speaking, I may have touched upon it, but I wasn't
18 particularly interested since it was not directly related to the topic.
19 I do know there was a meeting. I think there were several people
20 involved, including some senior internationals, but that's all I know,
21 I'm afraid.
22 Q. Let us move onto the next topic. We will now deal with the part
23 of the report that deals with the mortal remains of the killed members of
24 the 28th Division of the Army of BH. I wanted to draw the Chamber's
25 attention to P01557. It is General Ratko Mladic's order on returning
1 things to normal in the municipality of Srebrenica.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. MacDonald.
3 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, Your Honour. I would normally wait for my
4 friend to pose the question but the Prosecution would object to the
5 documents, the military documents which are -- in the English pages 48 to
6 page 50 of the witness's report being shown to him and the witness
7 commenting upon them. In the Prosecution's submission, it is outside the
8 expertise of this witness to interpret military orders. I believe he
9 also gives a reason with regard to infectious disease and epidemics as to
10 the fate of these bodies. That is outside of his expertise,
11 Your Honours.
12 MR. LUKIC: If I may, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
14 MR. LUKIC: We heard from Mr. Pavlovic at the beginning of his
15 testimony that his primary source in his work in the institute of missing
16 persons in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and on today's job, today's position are
17 military documents. The main issue of knowledge for his institute. He
18 worked before, and for his office today. It's -- we have military
19 documents tendered by the Prosecution through Ministry of Interior of
20 Denmark written in Cyrillic that the witness said he she that did not
21 have --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic --
23 MR. LUKIC: -- idea what that document is, and to say that
24 gentleman cannot comment on military documents is --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
1 MR. LUKIC: Is --
2 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... first of all, a witness of
3 fact is not an expert witness. You have presented this expert witness
4 and given his credentials in terms of identification, exhumation and
5 there was another, I think a third section.
6 Now, you now say, Whatever is only indirectly related to that
7 falls within his expertise as well. That's not true. I mean, the
8 analysis of military documents usually requires an extensive military --
9 military expertise which is supported by the training, by the experience
10 in the military field, et cetera, et cetera.
11 Now, you haven't presented this witness as such. You have
12 presented him as a witness in other fields. If this is what you think,
13 you should have presented him as a military expert and then you could
14 have told us.
15 MR. LUKIC: With all due respect, Your Honour, the first
16 operative. First operative in that institute. Everything went through
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic. I've seen persons who are first officers
19 or even directors of hospitals. That doesn't make them doctors. Let's
20 be clear on that. It's just a comparison. I leave it to that at this
22 Please proceed, but keep in mind, first of all, there's only an
23 overall objection, that there's an objection. I have not ruled on that
24 yet. With your questions, stay within the limits of the expertise of
25 this witness and then please proceed. And you may put questions in such
1 a way that you achieve your aim also by not relying on elements that are
2 not within the scope of his expertise.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. LUKIC: I just mentioned the first document, it's P exhibit,
5 so I don't know what the objection is, whether it should be [Overlapping
6 speakers] ...
7 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... if you would have listened
8 well, you would know what the objection was. Not to look at this
9 document, but to put a certain type of questions, and Mr. MacDonald
10 clearly explained that he did that unusually at this stage so as to be
11 clear what he expects you to do, and I think the Chamber expects to you
12 to stay within what we told you to do.
13 MR. LUKIC: Can we have on our screens 65 ter number from the
14 Prosecution list 05794, please.
15 Q. [Interpretation] Did you deal with the fate of those who
16 disappeared when you worked for the institute of missing persons in BiH?
17 A. Yes, those who went missing during the war in Bosnia or those who
18 went missing who originated from Bosnia.
19 Q. Did you rely on such documents as this one in the course of your
21 A. We would not have been able to do our job had we not relied on
22 military documents when it comes to those who went missing during the
24 Q. You are not a military expert.
25 A. No. I'm the head of sector who deals with intelligence and
1 analysis concerning the missing persons and the return of their remains
2 to their families.
3 Q. The document before us is dated the 20th July 1995 from the
4 command of the Drina Corps. We see here that asanacija or sanitation and
5 hygiene measures of the battle-field are concerned.
6 Under item 1, we find the following: "In co-operation with the
7 civil defence organs, health centres and hospitals, the organs of public
8 utilities enterprises and work organisations, and Ministries of Defence
9 of municipalities, immediately organise and proceed with the complete
10 clearing-up of the battle-field ..."
11 What kind of information did you gather? Who took part in
12 asanacija in terms of military and civilian authorities in the second
13 part of July in 1995?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. MacDonald.
15 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, Your Honour. We would have two objections
16 to that question.
17 Firstly, the who, if he is basing upon this order it would again
18 be interpretation.
19 Secondly, I think my friend referenced the word "battle-field"
20 which, again, the Prosecution would submit requires a military
21 interpretation for the area being talked about, which, again, outside the
22 witness's expertise, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could you lay a foundation for your question,
24 Mr. Lukic.
25 MR. LUKIC: I'll then -- posed open question.
1 JUDGE ORIE: That doesn't make the need to lay a foundation any
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. In the course of your work at the institute did anyone ever
5 object to you relying on such documents?
6 A. It is impossible. It is one of our primary sources --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Irrelevant question. Mr. Lukic, please proceed.
8 The question is not whether someone else objected to or did not
9 rely on it. We want to know -- the laying of a foundation is not whether
10 others commented on it.
11 Witness, what, in terms of battle-fields, what is your definition
12 of a battle-field and from where do you get that?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not deal with military
14 lexicon definitions. We were looking for those who went missing, and we
15 took into account all documents that assisted us in the process,
16 including, military ones. That was the context we worked in, and it
17 involved intelligence and analysis.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It's not an answer to my question.
19 Could you please put your next question to the witness,
20 Mr. Lukic.
21 Or perhaps I would have one. Witness, do you have any knowledge
22 about who in military structures would be tasked with sanitacija [phoen]
23 on the ground? And could you tell us on what basis you have knowledge
24 about that.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is clearly defined in this
1 document who is to be involved. There are rules of service that existed
2 on all sides. It was done by the bodies of civilian protection when
3 ordered by the military structures. That is general knowledge.
4 JUDGE ORIE: It's general knowledge, you say.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is general knowledge when it
6 comes to the work we did.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And those rules of service you are referring
8 to as relevant, could you tell us which rules of service you are
9 referring to?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In what sense? Precisely? You
11 want me to cite the documents and their numbers or something else? I
12 don't understand.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please describe them for me.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Rules of service define what
15 asanacija in the battle-field is, and it is specified who is to be
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could you then point at what rules of service would
18 apply in this context, in the context of this document? Indeed,
19 specifically rules so-and-so or ...
20 And Mr. Mladic is supposed not to speak aloud.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It wasn't necessary for me to deal
22 with the details of rules of service. We had to know how it all worked
23 in principle, and we can see it in this document. We can see who was
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To me, it was sufficient to be able
2 to follow it all.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that, that that's your
4 opinion. You said sanitation was done by the bodies of civil protection
5 when ordered by the military structures.
6 Where is that relation between the military structures
7 ordering --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Municipal? I talked about things
9 how they were inherited from the JNA in principle. The same principle
10 was adopted on all sides with variations. However in principle and
11 depending on the situation, it was done by public utilities enterprises
12 and the bodies of civilian protection, i.e., civilian authorities. To
13 what extent any military bodies were included depended on each particular
14 case. It was a chaotic state during the war and things were not all
15 orderly in place.
16 JUDGE ORIE: What were the rules on the involvement of the
17 military authorities in this respect? Should they order it?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not go into such detail. We
19 were interested in the principles.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic, and please keep in mind what we said
22 earlier about sticking to the expertise of the witness.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Lukic, if I may just go to your question that
24 started this debate.
25 At page 22, line 1, you said, "Who took part in the asanacija in
1 terms of military and civilian authorities in the second part of
2 July 1995."
3 This was after reading paragraph 1 of this document that's on the
4 list -- that's on the screen by asking who. Do you want additional
5 entities and people in addition to those mentioned in paragraph 1?
6 MR. LUKIC: No, I wanted if this witness has knowledge how it
7 worked in practice at that moment during his work, if he got any
8 additional information who actually did work on the terrain in the field.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: So you want his knowledge apart from what this
10 order says?
11 MR. LUKIC: Yeah Your Honour. If it's really implemented in
12 practice, if he got that information during his work. If he does not
13 know, he can tell me, I don't know.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't know. You go ahead.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, as part of your work at the institute, did you
17 follow this lead? Did you try to find those who went missing, whether
18 some of them were found on the ground and how many were buried?
19 A. It is a well-known fact, from my experience and that of my
20 colleagues as well as on the basis of the analysis of the documents I
21 read, that asanacija was always done in the period following a combat
22 activity. And we can see that in orders such as this one, as well as the
23 statements of those people who survived from the 28th Division. They
24 could see asanacija being implemented in the field. We also have regular
25 reports of VRS members who, for example, asked for additional fuel in
1 order to be -- to bury enemy soldiers. Some of it was done after
2 September 1995 during the joint work of the entity commissions.
3 From 1996 to date, perhaps some 700-plus sets of bodily remains
4 were exhumed, and I put together a list of some 660 people who were --
5 whose bodies were collected on the ground and identified.
6 Q. Just one moment. What was interpreted was that they were
7 exhumed. Were they exhumed or ...
8 A. They were collected from the surface. They were cleared. So
9 after that, there is the question in the context of this order and other
10 information that I referred to, where the rest of the bodies were. I'm
11 talking about thousands of bodies. And then here it is said that it is
12 essential to complete asanacija because, at that time of the year, it was
13 very hot and some diseases would break out and affect people and animals.
14 So on the basis of reviewing documents and some samples, I came to the
15 conclusion that these orders were carried out and that the asanacija was
16 implemented and obviously some of those bodies that were part of this
17 clearing of the terrain were buried in some mass graves.
18 Q. You mentioned a witness statement?
19 MR. LUKIC: [Previous translation continues] ... 1D06282, please.
21 JUDGE ORIE: But perhaps before we look at that, perhaps we first
22 take a break.
23 But before we do that, we'd like to see you back in 20 minutes,
24 Witness. But before we do that, I saw, Mr. Lukic, that -- you may follow
25 the usher.
1 That what is uploaded from Carl Bildt's book at this moment is
2 the entire book and, therefore ...
3 MR. LUKIC: We have to see with the Prosecution which parts they
4 want uploaded.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please --
7 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
8 JUDGE ORIE: -- define the excerpts as soon as possible so that
9 we can limit ourselves to a few pages rather than to 446.
10 We take a break and we resume at five minutes to 11.00.
11 --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.
12 --- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. MacDonald.
15 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
16 With regard to the last answer of the witness, the Prosecution
17 would consider that answer is outside of his expertise. We did not
18 object because unfortunately we found the question did not necessarily
19 elicit that answer. However, we appreciate that is now on the record.
20 It was an area that we hadn't intended to cross on, but given that it's
21 on the record now we consider that we consider the most efficient way
22 forward would simply be to cross-examine the witness on that claim,
23 Your Honour.
24 The question I had in mind was Mr. Lukic stating: "Mr. Pavlovic,
25 as part of your work at the institute, did you follow this lead, did you
1 try to find those who went missing" --
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: What page and what line.
3 MR. MacDONALD: Sorry. Temporary transcript 26, line 5,
4 Your Honours.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
6 [The witness takes the stand]
7 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
8 JUDGE ORIE: The witness entered the courtroom while you were
9 speaking. That doesn't cause you any problem from what you said?
10 MR. MacDONALD: No, Your Honour. Although if there's to be
11 further discussion on this, we would ask that it be outside the presence
12 of the witness, but I would --
13 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, one second.
14 I must admit due to overlapping speakers I do not know whether I
15 have a full recollection of what was said. But if you say you want to
16 cross-examine the witness on that. If Mr. Lukic wants to make any
17 comment you'd rather have it not in the presence of the witness.
18 MR. MacDONALD: Any further discussions right now, Your Honours,
20 JUDGE ORIE: Any further discussions.
21 Mr. Lukic, if you want to further discuss the matter, then we
22 have to ask the witness -- either to leave or at a later stage to leave
23 at least before the start of the cross-examination. If you say, well,
24 it's on the record. That's what will happen --
25 MR. LUKIC: I will discuss this, and, Your Honour, I would just
1 remind that this witness was called as an expert in tracing, exhumation
2 and identification. So tracing is what we were discussing here. He has
3 to trace first.
4 JUDGE ORIE: So apparently there's some dispute about whether it
5 falls within the field of expertise yes or no. You consider it was.
6 You've asked the question. The question has been answered. Despite your
7 opinion, Mr. MacDonald, you say, you will cross-examine the witness on
9 Fine. There seems to be no real problem. Please proceed.
10 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I will just recalled 1D06282
11 on our screens, please.
12 This is not translated. And I will just read one short part of
13 the statement. We need -- and this is statement of Suljic, Idriz from
14 30th November 1995. And if we can see page 3, please.
15 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, we're looking at paragraph 3 here,
16 the big, long paragraph. Line 10 from the top of the paragraph it states
17 the following: "While we were in Pobudje, we were watching from a hill
18 as the Chetniks in Pervane were walking along the asphalt road and
19 collecting bodies with a loader and loading them into a FAB truck. They
20 were driving them towards the village of Kravica, municipality of
22 MR. LUKIC: [Previous translation continues] ... from D01379 which
23 is federal Ministry of Defence, security and intelligence sector. We
24 read that also 500 Bosniaks were driven by trucks in the same direction.
25 We have P03518 that discusses the matter and we can find it in
1 paragraph 70 of the work of Mr. -- footnote 70 of the work of
2 Mr. Pavlovic.
3 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, today you talked about the 700
4 that were collected from the surface, from the ground. And you're
5 talking about your lowest assessment of 4.500 to 5.000 men who were
6 killed during the attempt to break through?
7 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, Your Honour. My friend has just referenced
8 in his question the conclusion of the witness which Your Honours
9 precisely stated was outside of his expertise the assessment of the
10 number of people who died.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Let's move on. What we said about it is clear.
12 Mr. Lukic, at this moment, refers to it. Let's leave it to that and
13 nothing more, nothing less.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. According to you and in your work, what was the conclusion that
17 you reached about where those bodily remains are?
18 A. As I explained in the previous session, and taking into account
19 all the documents that I went through, and in view of my experience in
20 this work, and on the basis of certain information and data, I reached
21 the conclusion that a certain number of bodies of those killed, members
22 of the 28th Division, during the breakthrough, were cleared when the
23 terrain was being cleared after the combat actions. This is also stated
24 in the order that we had the opportunity to see and that they were buried
25 in certain graves --
1 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the name of the
2 corps that the witness mentioned.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat the name of the corps you
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Drina Corps. Assistant
6 commander for logistics of the Drina Corps.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
8 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. You said in some graves. Which graves did you mean?
10 A. Well, in principle, according to the information that I found, it
11 is my opinion that these bodies that were cleared from the terrain were
12 buried in primary and secondary graves, as we refer to them.
13 Q. We will come to that, and we will look at a document.
14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] But before that, I would like to
15 tender document 65 ter 05794.
16 JUDGE ORIE: While we're waiting for that, do you have in mind
17 any graves that were exhumed and were presented in the evidence of the
18 Prosecution, or are you talking about other graves?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mentioned that in the overview,
20 in the table that I submitted. These are graves that relate to the
21 events in Srebrenica in 1995.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's not my question. My question is, we have
23 received evidence presented by the Prosecution about exhumation in mass
24 graves, and there's quite some detail. People who were identified, who
25 were found in those mass graves. When you're talking about these persons
1 having been buried in graves, do you have the same graves in your mind so
2 that they were found in those same graves, or do you have other graves in
3 your mind?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am not aware of exactly which
5 graves were mentioned by the Prosecution. I followed the trail of my own
6 information, and I presented that in the overview that I presented and
7 that I assume you received. I did not deal with information about
8 whether the Prosecution submitted something or not, but I think that this
9 evidence is clear. I -- I did present them.
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... let me stop you
12 The overview -- Apparently, Mr. Lukic, you understand what it is.
13 MR. LUKIC: It's --
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- it's --
15 MR. LUKIC: It's 1D06331. We're just coming to that after we
16 admit those documents.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It's not yet for us. We haven't seen it yet.
18 MR. LUKIC: At the beginning, Judge Moloto asked one question.
19 We just saw shortly that document. We are now going back to it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay --
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: We never really got it. As I said to you the
22 other day, we never got that document. And, you know, it's supposed to
23 have been part of the report and that part of report we never got.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We don't have it. That's one.
25 Second, Witness, do I understand you well that you are not aware
1 of the evidence presented to this Chamber in relation to exhumation of
2 persons, all the evidence, and let's say in the Srebrenica area in 1995,
3 you have no knowledge about what was presented as evidence to this
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that I said that I didn't
6 know in detail what the Prosecution submitted to the Chamber, which
7 graves these were. I didn't deal with that. I was just working on
8 tracing where the bodies could be of the persons who were killed in the
9 breakthrough. Those are the bodies that I was tracing. I was trying to
10 find out where those bodies could be. And so I presented to you the
11 evidence that I acquired.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. Let's move on. It's --
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sure you can answer the simple question:
14 Which graves did you deal with? From which graves did you exhumed the
15 people that you analysed?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I submitted that in the material in
17 the analysis --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... you've got to
19 know what graves you went to analyse. We will look at the document when
20 it comes, as Mr. Lukic has told us. He is getting to that. But can you
21 answer the question right now.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm afraid that we're not
23 understanding each other. I'm talking about the manner in which I, in
24 this segment, reached conclusions in my analytical process. I did not go
25 and exhume anything --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ...
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These skeletons were already
4 If you permit me, I can explain.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: We'll get to that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: We'll get to that. I'm just a bit surprised that
7 talking about large numbers of dead persons having been found in graves,
8 that you cannot tell us whether these were graves which were exhumed by
9 the Prosecution or through the intervention of the Prosecution, or
10 whether these were exhumations done separately by your people.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is something that I can't
12 answer. I'm sorry, forgive me. Perhaps I misunderstood.
13 All the mass graves, primary and secondary graves, linked to the
14 events in and around Srebrenica in July 1995 were exhumed either by the
15 Prosecutor's office, I assume, or by the authorised prosecutor's offices
16 in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is clear. No one else could have been
17 performing these exhumations from these graves.
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I analysed the data from those
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the exhumations not performed by your own
22 people but performed by the Prosecution or those instructed by the
23 Prosecution to do so. Is that ...
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Members in my sector took part in
25 the exhumation, each exhumation is an investigative action under the
1 jurisdiction of a specific prosecutor's office, so pursuant to
2 international agreements, we are present during the exhumation process
3 from start to finish. But for specific segments of our work, we use
4 certain sectors. For intelligence aspects of our works, we use the
5 intelligence institutions. For information from exhumations, we
6 co-operate with the prosecutor's offices, and so on and so forth. And
7 this is something that is ongoing until the bodies are handed back to the
8 family members.
9 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. MacDonald,
10 you're on your feet.
11 MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Your Honours. With regard to 1D06331,
12 that is the list that Mr. Lukic briefly showed I believe on Monday and
13 plans to proceed to, the witness stated that he provided it with material
14 with his report. We received that list on Sunday evening at 5.30,
15 Your Honours, and we have yet to receive the majority of the supporting
16 documentation underlying it. And I was going to bring this up when
17 Mr. Lukic moved to that list, but seeing as the witness has claimed, I
18 believe, he provided it with the material with his analysis, we didn't
19 get it till Sunday, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, it seems to be pretty relevant to know
21 what the witness in this respect presented, because I went through his
22 report searching, for example, for the word mass or mass graves,
23 et cetera and then you hardly find any concrete information. But
24 apparently there is a list unknown to us, although presented by the
25 witness. Let's move on and let's wait for what happens.
1 MR. LUKIC: I can also tell you the concern of Mr. MacDonald, he
2 asked me whether I have statements that support this list I'm going
3 through just in few moments, and I said that Mr. Pavlovic brought some
4 statements, but it was too late to put them in the record and I couldn't
5 ask him since I could not --
6 JUDGE ORIE: When did you receive the list? That's first.
7 The second support for that list maybe have come late.
8 When did you receive that list?
9 MR. LUKIC: Mr. Pavlovic provided that list to us when he came
11 JUDGE ORIE: The list of the --
12 MR. LUKIC: 6331. We uploaded as Mr. MacDonald just told us.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Pavlovic, you said you expect us to know about
14 that list. When did you provide that list to the Prosecution, the list,
15 the attachment?
16 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
17 JUDGE ORIE: Hmm?
18 MR. LUKIC: To the Defence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: To the Defence, yes.
20 When did you do that?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that you knew about the
22 document because, on Monday, you had it in front of you. I brought it
23 with me, and I gave it to the Defence as an overview of specific examples
24 on the basis of which I reached certain conclusions.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And you didn't bother to do that when you presented
1 the report? To the Defence.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To be honest, I am not quite versed
3 in all the procedures that have to do with your work, so I am in this
4 situation for the first time. I must say so.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let's move on. It's --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yeah, but in your work, didn't you see that as
7 part of your work as a person who is going to -- who specialising in
8 tracing, exhumation and identification of people who lost their lives in
9 war? Didn't you think we need to know who you have identified?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're probably right. But there
11 was some objective circumstances. To be honest, I didn't even know till
12 the last day whether I would be coming to testify at all. I mean, there
13 was some confusion about whether I would testify or not. Now, I was
14 informed a day or two before. I had no idea that I would actually be
15 coming to testify. There were many things that were unclear, at least as
16 far as I'm concerned. I'm not really somebody who is familiar with this
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... to court.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because -- excuse me. Because
20 these are working overviews that I used. And I showed that to the
21 Defence when I was speaking with the Defence counsel. I wanted to
22 explain to them how I came to certain conclusions. This was during
23 preparation for testimony.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: You didn't think that these were necessary for the
25 court to see. You say you don't understand how we work, and I don't
1 understand how you've bothered to have this list, if you didn't see it as
2 part of your work. If you saw it as part of your work, I don't know why
3 you didn't make it part of your report.
4 You see my problem?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. Of course.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, please move on.
7 MR. LUKIC: I offered for admission 05794.
8 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
9 Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: That Exhibit D1397, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
12 MR. LUKIC: And the next one, 1D06282.
13 JUDGE ORIE: No objections either.
14 Mr. Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: That will be MFI D1398, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: D1398 is marked for identification.
17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you. And now we would move to this one,
19 Maybe it's easier if we only go through English version.
20 Q. [Interpretation] We see the document in front of us, the English
21 version of the document. Who drafted this document?
22 A. I drafted this overview.
23 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
24 MR. MacDONALD: Sorry, Your Honours. I discussed with my friend
25 I think this document should not be broadcast [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 MR. LUKIC: I thought only on page 4.
2 MR. MacDONALD: It's page 5, actually, but ...
3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. You have apparently considered what could be
4 broadcast and what not. Please stay on the safe side, Mr. Lukic.
5 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Did we get the answer? Yes, yes, you said that
7 you drafted the document.
8 What is this document? What does it show?
9 A. This document gives an overview of specific examples that led me
10 to assess and to conclude that the large number of bodies of casualties
11 of the breakthrough of the 28th Division, which is referred to in
12 military analysis on the Bosniak side, also based on eye-witness reports,
13 media reports, and also scientific research of the actions of the
14 28th Division, as well as testimonies of family members and combatants,
15 so I tried, pursuant to my own work description, to work out where these
16 bodies could have ended up, and this is a kind of overview of all the
17 examples of certain members of the 28th Division indicating where their
18 bodies were cleared from the terrain and possibly where they were buried.
19 Q. It was interpreted that these are all of the cases. Did you
20 include all of them or were these just some kind of samples?
21 A. As I said, this is just an excerpt.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could we --
23 MR. LUKIC: No, it's -- it's just some examples, is what the
24 witness said. It's not excerpts. It's not all the examples. Some
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, you're not there to do the
2 interpretation. If there's any doubt about it, you know how to deal with
4 You say these are examples. How many disputed cases do you have
5 in total?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not enumerate them here. I
7 just mentioned some examples that I could. I don't know exactly. We can
8 count them. In any case, it raises some concern or creates some doubt
9 that I used to follow the lead and, if necessary, I can explain.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I was, first of all, interested in -- if you
11 say, These are examples. First of all, how many examples do we have in
12 this document?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For example, for the first category
14 of arguments, I mention only two or three examples.
15 For the second category, perhaps ten.
16 JUDGE ORIE: How many in total in this document, I asked you.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not count them. I'm sorry.
18 We can count them now? It wasn't important to me at that time.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, if you say examples, then it's -- it's
20 some out of a total. How many cases in total you had reason to dispute;
21 that's one. But before you answer that question, could you tell what was
22 the dispute? I mean, what makes it disputed?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's like this: I mentioned the
24 categories of argument as I defined them. The first set of arguments and
25 examples includes people who are still missing --
1 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... stop you there.
2 Where do we find exactly in this document, if we find it in this
3 document, the set of arguments? Or is it in your report? And if it is
4 in your report, where is it in your report?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I specified in the report. I
6 specified what was the basis of dispute and then I followed it up with
7 specific examples.
8 For the first group, or set of examples, we have the people
9 who --
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... stop you there.
11 Where in this report do we find this first group or first set of
12 examples? Where do we have them? On ...
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would have to go through this to
14 find them by their first and last name. I can't remember them all. But
15 I would be able to indicate them. For example, the names of people who
16 were found at Tisova Kosa and some mortal remains from the same body were
17 found on the surface, whereas another part of the skeleton was found in a
18 mass grave. And I have, say, another two examples like that, that I
19 mentioned. That would be one group. And they are in the overview.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then I go back to my first question. What is then
21 in dispute about these remains?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's no dispute. It was just
23 something that led me further to consider the process of asanacija of
24 those killed from the 28th Division, indicating that the bodily remains
25 were collected after combat and then buried in certain graves. Perhaps
1 only weeks after the event.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And in dispute with what exactly? I mean,
3 apparently you have developed some thoughts on how these bodily remains
4 ended up at certain places. Are you opposing any other thoughts? Are
5 you opposing conclusions drawn by others on those bodily remains?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the title of the document, we
7 can't find -- no, I see it says "disputed."
8 Yes. Maybe I added the title later. What I wanted to mention
9 were the examples that in the course of my work may have served as an
10 indication in -- about where some bodily remains ended. There's no
11 dispute from point of view. I'm simply trying to find the people who
12 went missing during the breakthrough. I was just trying to show that
13 some of those people were collected from the surface as part of the
14 asanacija process and later buried in certain mass graves. There is no
15 dispute, per se.
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... no dispute,
17 although you used that in the title. Well, at least it's now clear that
18 there is no dispute. These are just cases where you thought that
19 specific attention should be paid to the details in order to find out how
20 and -- how they may have died. Is that ... under what circumstances.
21 Is that well understood?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. These examples prove that
23 there was asanacija after combat and that these people were then buried
24 in mass graves.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's three steps further. But I leave it to
1 Mr. Lukic to further ask questions about it.
2 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before he does, what you've just said, sir,
4 about that they prove that there was asanacija after combat and these
5 people were then buried in mass graves, was that the objective your
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The objective of my report is to
8 analyse the losses during the breakthrough of the 28th Division and the
9 fate of the mortal remains of those who perished, i.e., where they ended
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Where they ended up that was the objective: To
12 find where they ended up. Thank you so much.
13 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Where did you get your information from, the information you
15 entered in this document?
16 A. I referred to the examinations of bone samples.
17 Q. Who did that?
18 A. Let me continue. So bone samples concerning all the exhumations
19 done so far, primarily by the ICMP. I think there is a report before
20 this Tribunal with the names of those who were exhumed, as well as bone
21 samples and the locations where they were found and taken from. It also
22 included all of the documents we have referred to previously. It is in
23 the footnotes.
24 Q. You mentioned that some bodies were found on the surface while
25 others may have been found partially on the surface and partially in mass
2 Let us look at page 2 of this document. You mentioned
3 Tisova Kosa. Let's look at the last name on the page.
4 MR. LUKIC: It's not the same as I -- yeah, yeah, we have it.
5 The last name on the second page.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Please explain this entry so that I don't put
7 questions to you.
8 A. We see that the body of this person was collected at Tisova Kosa
9 as part of asanacija. We also have the bone sample number. It is TIS 1
10 and so on. However it was also exhumed from the mass grave Cancarski
11 Put 12. These are exhumation documents. Such information exists with
12 every case of exhumation where the body receives a designated number, as
13 well as bone samples numbers, so it can be seen where the body was found.
14 That information comes from the ICMP report in 2013 that was forwarded.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you, it says, "removed as part of
16 sanitation of the terrain on location Tisova Kosa what's the basis for
17 that knowledge? It doesn't say what the source of that information is.
18 Could you tell us on what basis you make this statement?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you find this person in the
20 specific database I just mentioned, you will see that in the ICMP
21 database it stated that the person was found at the two locations, as I
23 JUDGE ORIE: No. But you said it was part of a sanitation of
24 terrain. Does is say in the ICMP this was sanitation of the terrain and
25 there -- and how did they establish that it was sanitation of the
1 terrain, rather than just finding parts of a body there?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're right, I'm sorry. Of
3 course, I consulted other databases with respect to where people were
4 found. At the institute we do have an overview of where people were
5 found. When discussing asanacija, some people, their bodily remains were
6 found in two or three different places because the bones were dispersed
7 and then there are people whose remains can be found in a number of
8 different graves. We have all that information for the people, the
9 location of Tisova Kosa means that they were collected from the ground on
10 the surface. It can easily be checked and verified.
11 JUDGE ORIE: You certainly are aware that whether people are
12 found as a result of sanitation of the terrain or in any other context is
13 a -- seems to be a rather important matter in this case. Where do you
14 find that this body, apart from being found in Tisova Kosa, that it was
15 found during the sanitation of terrain; and if so, sanitation of the
16 terrain by whom?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Asanacija and exhumation was done
18 by the acting prosecutor's offices at the point in time on orders from
19 the prosecutors who were in charge. As part of the forensic team, there
20 is -- there's a pathologist who marks every bone sample --
21 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... let me stop you
22 there. So when you say as part of sanitation of the terrain, you're not
23 referring to any sanitation of the terrain by the military after combat
24 or something like that, but you're referring to a search on the terrain
25 by not by the parties to the conflict but, rather, by those who were
2 Is that what you referred to?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. This part of the skeleton was
4 found as part of asanacija after 1996. It is obvious that somebody was
5 collecting the bodies on the surface and buried them because some of them
6 were, indeed, collected.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But it now at least becomes a bit clear to me
8 where the word "asanacija" is often used in a totally different context,
9 and I take it that you're aware of that. You don't know that asanacija
10 is often used in evidence before this Chamber in the context of the armed
11 forces -- armed forces --
12 MR. LUKIC: They are not receiving translation.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, there is no translation. Okay. Could we just
14 check. Yes, it's there again.
15 Are you aware that asanacija is often used in evidence as a
16 reference to the armed forces clearing up the terrain after combat
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I also discussed that type of
19 asanacija after combat. Perhaps I may have been unclear, but when I
20 mention it here, it involves forensic investigation.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And what's now is the specific problem here,
22 apart from that parts of the bodies were found in two different
23 locations? What -- I mean, that happened often as we have heard. What's
24 now the specific problem here? Because you said it proves something.
25 What does it prove?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In examples such as this, where
2 some remains were found on the surface as part of asanacija by the acting
3 prosecutor's office, whereas another part of the same person was found in
4 a mass grave may indicate or may lead us to suppose that asanacija was
5 done after combat, as foreseen by the order we saw stemming from the
6 Drina Corps.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Well -- let me just re-read what you now said. One
8 second, please.
9 You are telling us that this indicates that this was the type of
10 asanacija stemming from the Drina Corps order. At the same time, you're
11 telling us that this was asanacija by investigative bodies and that's --
12 you're mixing up here -- at least that's what I am putting to you.
13 You're mixing up the asanacija by the armed forces and the asanacija in
14 the context of investigation. What makes you link this asanacija to the
15 Drina Corps order?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. Perhaps I was
17 unclear. I can try to clarify.
18 What I'm saying is this: The asanacija performed at Tisova Kosa
19 in regard to this specific person was a forensic investigation, and we
20 have the bone samples, identification numbers. At the same time, other
21 parts of the same person were found in a mass grave elsewhere as part of
22 another asanacija. Such examples may indicate that following an order of
23 the Drina Corps after combat - perhaps a few weeks later - bodily remains
24 were collected, those belonging to members of the 28th Division, and then
25 buried in certain mass graves.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I now at least understand what is, in my view,
2 rather unclear in this report or in this overview, but at least it has
3 become a bit clearer what you meant.
4 Mr. MacDonald.
5 MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 At temporary transcript page 45, Mr. Pavlovic said he consulted
7 other databases with regard to this overview. We have -- we the
8 Prosecution have no idea what they are and we don't seem to have access
9 to that information, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you could have asked that -- that's clear. You
11 could have asked that in cross-examination.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
13 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. [Previous translation
14 continues] ... this name we can find in P01901 at page 122. That's ICMP
15 list of missing persons.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Can you give the name again Mr. Lukic.
17 MR. LUKIC: It's P01901.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, no. You said -- if you look at page 48, line
19 21 you said, this name we can find in P01901. What is the name we find
20 in that document.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Before we -- P1901 is not a public document so we
24 should be careful with names.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
2 Q. [Interpretation] In this table, are there other examples such as
3 this one where some bodies were collected on the surface as part of the
4 asanacija performed by investigative authorities while, at the same time,
5 other bodily remains belonging to the same people who were found in a
6 mass grave? Do you know any such other examples?
7 A. I can't recall the names, but I think there are two or three
8 other examples. I'm very bad with -- at remembering names. I think
9 there are two examples.
10 Q. Sefik, Dugonic; does he belong in the same category?
11 A. I suppose so but I would have to check because there were many
13 MR. LUKIC: It's time for break, and I think that I'll move on.
14 And I don't have much left.
15 JUDGE ORIE: "Not much" is how much?
16 MR. LUKIC: I'm just -- I'll just be dealing with this document.
17 And I'll show one name from this P1901.
18 JUDGE ORIE: We'll take --
19 MR. LUKIC: Probably ten, 15 minutes, I think it would be enough.
20 For me.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Unclear questions and unclear evidence often
22 trigger the need for clarification.
23 You may -- the witness may follow the usher. But the usher has
24 left. So he'll be back in a second.
25 Mr. MacDonald.
1 MR. MacDONALD: Your Honour, we wonder if it's possible if we
2 could get any of the information the witness is referring to for this
3 overview. We don't have it just now.
4 JUDGE ORIE: You -- you mean what exactly?
5 [The witness stands down]
6 MR. MacDONALD: In particular, the databases right now is the
7 first time we've heard about them.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I left it to cross-examination. I take it
9 if --
10 Mr. Lukic, have you any idea what it is?
11 MR. LUKIC: Those databases must be from his work or --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Not from his work? Oh, must be from his work.
13 MR. LUKIC: Must be from his work or maybe he refers to the
14 documents he searched from our databases. Either from us or from his
16 JUDGE ORIE: We'll ask the witness the first thing after the
17 break whether he could identify any of the other databases. I know that
18 you are losing 20 minutes, about that's -- I -- I prefer not to deal with
19 these kind of matters outside the courtroom with the witness, and,
20 therefore, we'll leave it until after the break.
21 MR. MacDONALD: If I can just say one more thing, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. MacDONALD: Also, the witness statements that he relies upon,
24 I think. We're not sure but he brought some material with
25 him [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... I didn't have a chance to
2 ask him, since I discussed it yesterday or the day before with
3 Mr. MacDonald, since I could not contact the witness. So I really don't
4 have answer to that, whether he has -- which they are. We have to ask
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. MacDONALD: We understand that he would have it, Your Honour,
8 that he brought it to The Hague, the material behind this list.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If he didn't bring it to The Hague, then it's
10 of no use to further insist. We'll ask the witness after the break.
11 We'll take the break and resume at ten minutes last 12.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 11.53 a.m.
13 --- On resuming at 12.10 p.m.
14 JUDGE ORIE: It may be that since we're running out of time that
15 a few decisions which are taken already, that the Chamber may communicate
16 although they're not officially yet on the record what these decisions
17 are so as to allow the parties to continue to work and not to wait until
18 the end of January to hear about what those decisions are, but sometimes
19 we are running out of time, but we'll inform you then by informal means
20 of communication.
21 [The witness takes the stand]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, please proceed.
23 MR. LUKIC: I think my learned friend wanted to inquire with the
24 witness whether he has --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, you are right. Thank you for reminding me.
1 You earlier referred to database and other sources. Could you
2 tell us, first of all, what they are; second, whether they have --
3 whether you have them here with you here in The Hague.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These are documents that I used in
5 my analysis, ICMP reports on exhumations and the asanacija, which I cited
6 in my footnotes. I have -- other than those documents, I have a
7 scientific study which was done by Mr. Cekic which I also mentioned in my
8 footnote, which was done by my colleague Mr. Masovic and another
9 colleague --
10 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not catch the name.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- and these are overviews of mass
12 graves as well as an overview of the localities where the asanacija were
13 carried out.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from the name of Mr. Masovic, you mentioned
15 another name. Could you please repeat that other name?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These are my colleagues from the
17 institute. Mr. Masovic and then also Mr. Murat Hrtic [phoen] who was the
18 chief of the regional office.
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... to repeat the
20 name. That was the only thing I was asking.
21 And my second question was whether you have those materials with
22 you here in The Hague.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were submitted as part of the
24 analysis. They were submitted as attachments.
25 JUDGE ORIE: When did you give them to the Defence?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I gave them to the Defence together
2 with the analysis.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Have they been disclosed, Mr. Lukic?
4 MR. LUKIC: Everything we received we uploaded.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's move on. ICMP doesn't come as a
6 surprise perhaps. The other materials I leave it in your hands later to
7 explore what --
8 MR. MacDONALD: Well, Your Honour, just to say the list that
9 we're talking about, 1D06331, the material is there we -- apart from a
10 few witness statements mentioned also in the report. We don't have any
11 of them and the databases referred to, we don't have that either, so I'm
12 not sure what Mr. Pavlovic is saying what he gave to the Defence and
14 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know either. I can't answer the question at
15 this moment.
16 Mr. Lukic, please proceed.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, these witness statements that you relied on in this
19 table, do you have them with you?
20 A. Yes, I have them here. In electronic form.
21 Q. Since the Defence only has four or five witness statements from
22 this table, I think we found only four or five witness statements, how
23 many do you have with you? The Prosecution will probably ask you that
24 and will probably ask you to hand them over to them, if you can.
25 A. Yes, I will find them and submit them just as I did with the
1 other material. That's no problem.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at page 6 of this
5 Q. We can see here that it says sanitization and the names on the
6 left-hand side, Sefik, Dugonic; Beriz, Pasic?
7 A. Yes, that's that.
8 Q. What does this group have -- talk about? What does it indicate?
9 A. Those two names, just like in previous cases, parts of the
10 skeleton were found on the ground on the surface and then the prosecutor
11 undertook some investigative work whereas the rest of the skeleton of
12 these two individuals was found in mass graves.
13 Q. Are you able to tell us which mass grave on the basis of what is
14 written here?
15 A. The first person was found in Zeleni Jadar 5. And then for the
16 second individual, it's the mass grave of Adzici in the municipality of
18 Q. Thank you. Let's continue. I would now like us to look at the
19 second page of the document.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just try to explore --
21 Is there any dispute about certain body parts being found at
22 different locations in this respect?
23 Mr. McCloskey.
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. This is the first we're
25 hearing of body parts that were found in the -- in the field and then
1 found in mass graves, and we don't have the -- you know, a complete idea
2 of the records, and we would like to get them. This is, as you pointed
3 out, a significant issue and the -- the quicker we can get the records
4 and get to the bottom of it, we'll be able to help.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: And cross-examine the person properly.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, this material, I mean, this apparently is
8 something of substance rather than that who is biased and who is doing
9 wrong, et cetera, this is a -- and that material was only received two
10 days does not clearly appear in the report. If you say it's important
11 because it's genocide, take your own work and the work of this expert
12 seriously. Because, as you may have noticed, I asked some questions
13 about this because this is probably a matter of substance, rather than a
14 lot of things which seem to -- have far less substance, but this was not
15 disclosed in time. Let's leave it to that at this moment and please
16 proceed, for the time being.
17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Are we on page 2?
18 Q. [Interpretation] We can see the fifth name. It's not actually
19 part of that category. But I'm going to ask you this. The next category
20 of examples indicating your reasons for believing that they are linked
21 with combat and mass graves, could you tell us what that is.
22 A. That is the group of examples that also leads to the possible
23 conclusion that this was done, that asanacija was carried out after
24 combat, and that the bodies were buried in mass graves. These are
25 statements that I went through of eye-witnesses of the events who
1 referred to the names of those who were killed in the breakthrough, so I
2 was tracing those persons to see where they were found, and I found that
3 some of those persons were exhumed from specific mass graves. And
4 according to witness statements that I looked at, they were killed during
5 breakthrough and they remained on the ground, on the surface.
6 Q. Could you please look at the third name on this page. Are you
7 able to tell us anything on the basis of that example?
8 A. This is a specific example of a person - I will not mention the
9 name - his brother gave a statement and when he provided the statement to
10 the security organs of the Bosniak side, he said that his brother had
11 died in Kamenica, which we already spoke about, but then the person was
12 exhumed from Glogova 2 and Bljeceva 2 mass graves, meaning that the body
13 parts were exhumed from two graves.
14 Q. Now we would need to look at page --
15 JUDGE ORIE: I'm still trying to find on page 2 in e-court, we're
16 dealing with which? I'm not inviting you to --
17 MR. LUKIC: Third from the top.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Third name from the top.
19 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see that. Yes.
21 MR. LUKIC: I think -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Well, that's --
23 MR. LUKIC: We can say that name, I think. There is no ...
24 [Overlapping speakers] ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: The statement ... yes, I'm the overlapping speaker.
1 Apologies for that. Do we have that statement? Is it in evidence? Is
2 it available? Where is it?
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Pavlovic.
5 A. I cannot say it off the top of my head, if I submitted it or not.
6 I submitted some statements additionally as well, so I just cannot say it
7 off the top of my head. The statements are with me. I have them. So I
8 can provide any of them, if any of them are missing.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. MacDonald.
10 MR. MacDONALD: For the last two examples, both of the ones on
11 page 2, we did not receive those statements, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So, therefore, we're unable to --
13 MR. LUKIC: I verified we did not -- because those statements
14 were brought late and we did not have time. We had that virus, we
15 couldn't upload anything, so we [Overlapping speakers] ...
16 JUDGE ORIE: You have them?
17 MR. LUKIC: I didn't even take them from Mr. Pavlovic since I
18 said it was -- it's too late, we cannot upload them but I think that he
19 can check.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
21 MR. LUKIC: And we are ready and I think that Mr. Pavlovic would
22 agree that he can be recalled for cross-examination if the Prosecution is
23 not ready to proceed and he will be -- can be back in a month. Because
24 of this issue, we anticipated and he agreed to be back whenever
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. MacDonald.
2 MR. MacDONALD: We found some statements, Your Honours, from a
3 search of our own systems, so we do have some cross-examination for
4 Mr. Pavlovic on this matter. But depending upon Your Honours' guidance,
5 it would be whether --
6 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... well, we'll consider how
7 to proceed whether you would already start cross-examination or that
8 cross-examination would be postponed or ... we'll consider that. But at
9 least it's clear that some of the materials a party may wish to have in
10 order to prepare for cross-examination may not be available at this
12 MR. LUKIC: And maybe my proposal, if Mr. MacDonald wants to sit
13 with somebody from the Registry and collect from Mr. Pavlovic what they
14 need, then just to be in presence of Registry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That's all practicalities we'll consider.
16 MR. LUKIC: Okay --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
19 Next page we cannot broadcast. It's -- and we need page 5. So
20 it should not be broadcasted so technicians should be warned probably. I
21 don't know.
22 Q. [Interpretation] Could you please look at the sixth name on this
24 A. Yes, I see it.
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Is the statement
1 available which is mentioned here?
2 MR. LUKIC: Give me one second.
3 It's not disclosed through -- through us.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. What can you tell us?
7 A. In the statement of the witness of the event that he provided to
8 the security organ, it can be seen that that person in question died
9 during the breakthrough. I cannot now determine whether they died a
10 natural death or were killed, but they were found in the Zvornik 2 mass
12 JUDGE ORIE: I see only one name. You're talking about "they."
13 "They were found."
14 Is that the sixth on the list? I see that one name.
15 MR. LUKIC: I have one name too, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you explain why you said "they" where we
17 find only one name?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that specific individual was
19 found in the Zvornik 02 grave.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at page 7 of the
23 JUDGE ORIE: And if you have any recollection still looking at
24 the present one, apparently there's witness statement who says he died
25 around Buljim. Do you remember whether that witness statement was a --
1 whether he observed him when he died? Or what did that witness say
2 exactly about the circumstances of death around Buljim?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I took examples where the
4 eye-witness said that they saw an individual die or get killed, not that
5 they heard but that they actually saw the person dying or being killed.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So if we would have a look at that statement, then
7 we would find that that person saw (redacted) die in the area of
8 Buljim. Is that your testimony?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Now, we're talking about a
10 different individual; is that correct? The one above the one that we
11 were talking about; is that right?
12 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... I'm sorry, I
13 didn't --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right. Very well. I'm not
15 sure if we can mention names. Here the way it is phrased in the comment,
16 perhaps it's not precise enough, but I was taking examples that I
17 mentioned, i.e., exclusively examples where a witness said that they
18 actually were an eye-witness and saw the person get killed or die.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And that's then true for entry 5 and 6 of -- because
20 I refer to 5. I think you refer to 6. But both are the same in this
21 respect on page 5 in e-court; 5 out of 13.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Well, you talked about name 5 in response to Judge Orie's
25 question. Now, I would like to ask you about name number 7 on this same
1 page. Is that a similar example as the previous one?
2 A. Yes. According to the eye-witness statement, which he gave to
3 the security organs, this specific person was killed at the beginning of
4 the breakthrough in the area of Buljim on the 12th of July and was
5 exhumed from the Cerska mass grave.
6 Q. And then what did you tell us? The people that you cited here as
7 examples, were they found in primary or secondary, or both in primary and
8 secondary graves?
9 A. From what I was able to see, their bodily remains were found both
10 in primary and secondary graves.
11 Q. I would just like to say that on page 2 you already dealt with
12 Buljim and person number 5. Now, I would like to ask you what the next
13 group of examples is that would point to the conclusion that asanacija of
14 the terrain was carried out in 1995 when people killed in combat were
15 buried in mass graves?
16 A. The next group of examples --
17 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
18 Mr. MacDonald.
19 MR. MacDONALD: That's an incredibly leading question,
20 Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's -- it certainly is. It's, at the same time, of
22 course, it's part of the report so therefore if doesn't -- I mean, the
23 main basis not putting leading questions you bring to mind of a person a
24 certain thought whereas if this is already explained in the report, it is
25 not bringing it to his mind.
1 MR. MacDONALD: I would agree but I think Your Honours asked
2 about where the different groups in this list are and there don't appear
3 to be any, so I don't understand.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. Let's -- let's -- the mere fact that
5 it's to some extent leading does not result in me ruling that the witness
6 shouldn't answer the question.
7 Could you please answer the question? And if need be, Mr. Lukic
8 will repeat to you.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can answer that question by
10 Mr. Lukic. I already started answering.
11 The next group of examples refers to persons who appear in death
12 certificates that are issued after the final identification has been done
13 and they're issued by the court. So next to the report of final
14 identification, a death certificate is issued. On the other side of the
15 document, towards the bottom, cause of death is mentioned and while
16 examining the certificates of death in some examples I observed that some
17 persons had sustained injuries from explosive devices and those persons
18 were exhumed from graves, and I enclosed those certificates of death with
19 the report.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just get clarification.
21 The question was the next group and then you also answered about
22 the next group. Could I be guided as to what group is this that you are
23 talking about?
24 MR. LUKIC: Can we see page 8 of this document, Your Honour, and
25 then [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Overlapping speakers] ... I'm looking -- I see
2 page 5 of the document.
3 MR. LUKIC: I first asked the question not to lead.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure, and I understand. I just --
5 MR. LUKIC: Okay, yeah.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just want to know what we are talking about.
7 MR. LUKIC: And now we are talking about page 8 from this
8 document. It will be shortly in front of us.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's better. Now I have something different.
10 So we're talking about the whole page?
11 MR. LUKIC: Now I will direct the attention of the witness to
12 Alic, Husein, and we will need ...
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: What number is he?
14 MR. LUKIC: We need row 2 on the right-hand side. So ...
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated]
16 MR. LUKIC: It's number 268 and we need right side of the page.
17 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, can you see --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... could we
19 see 268.
20 MR. LUKIC: Yes, it's on the left-hand side. Can we. It's 288,
21 sorry. Or 286.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then we are looking at the third row, number 288.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated]
24 JUDGE ORIE: 286 doesn't appear on page 8.
25 MR. LUKIC: It does.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let me have a look.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is it 286 or 288 you are talking about.
4 MR. LUKIC: Let me check. I'm semi-blind, Your Honour, you know
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I didn't know that.
7 MR. LUKIC: It's obvious. Give me one second. It's -- it's 288.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Do you see the name, Husein Alic?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. What can you -- will you please tell us what we should look at on
13 this page and what would you like to explain to us from this page?
14 A. Looking at the documents from the final identification of this
15 person and while reviewing the certificate of death that is signed by the
16 pathologist in the investigation, I saw that the injuries the person
17 sustained were of -- were caused by explosives and, as a result of that,
18 it seemed to point me in the direction of -- well, I know from the
19 operational sense, I know that the 28th Division was shelled, they ran
20 into mines, and they were also committing suicide by using grenades so
21 these would be possible injuries sustained by those means. So then I
22 said that after the asanation [as interpreted] these persons were buried
23 in mass graves.
24 JUDGE ORIE: What does that prove apart from that we haven't seen
25 the -- the post-mortem? At least I'm not aware of it. What does it
1 prove? It's -- you suggest, I think, that he must have died in a combat
2 situation where explosives were used. Could it be any other environment
3 where explosives were used? I mean, what's your conclusion? Apart from
4 that a person which apparently died from explosive -- I don't know yet,
5 shrapnel or other things. He was found in a mass grave. That's
6 apparently the facts you rely on. What does that tell us? More than
7 what I said.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I mentioned, I relied on witness
9 statements and ABiH military documents. It is clear from those sources
10 that the 28th Division was exposed to heavy artillery shelling. They
11 came upon minefields and committed suicide; in certain cases by hand
12 grenade. That is why I found it interesting, given the context and that
13 there is a possibility, in addition to other evidence I mentioned, that
14 this, too, could lead us to the assumption that after combat there was
15 asanacija and that people were buried in mass graves.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But could you exclude that explosives were
17 used in other circumstances?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In terms of this specific location,
19 I can't say anything. I'm simply trying to raise an issue, open up a
20 possibility. I did not draw a conclusion. There is a possibility that
21 would be in keeping with some other sources.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I now better understand.
23 Mr. Lukic, those materials, are they available? Because you
24 point at a specific example, so I take it that you have reviewed the
25 underlying documentation. Apart from the format of this part of the
1 report being totally different from what we saw before, any explanation
2 for that to be elicited from the witness?
3 Witness, we see numbers; not sequential. We see all kind of
4 information. That's quite different from what we saw in the beginning.
5 What explains the difference in format between the beginning of this
6 report and the present portion we're looking at?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is it a question for me?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 THE WITNESS: Okay. [Interpretation] As I said already, this was
10 a kind of overview of mine of certain examples that I forwarded to the
11 Defence, and this is how they decided to present it.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Do I then understand that the Defence has created
13 these green lines, et cetera, totally different from these first part of
14 these examples, and if what is the case I'd like to know. Mr. Lukic
15 seems to be nodding no. So he is apparently not accepting an answer
16 which says that you gave it to the Defence and it was formatted by them.
17 MR. LUKIC: We merged those two documents into one. That's what
18 we did but we didn't put this green --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Where does this material come from? Let's say on
20 from page 8 where the different format starts and of which we see now the
21 first page, page 8 to 12, I think, or perhaps even 13.
22 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
23 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... which is a totally
24 different format. Could you tell us where you got that from? Witness.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I created this overview, and, in
1 principle, there were two different formats, but the issue on hand is the
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The numbers we start with, that is, the
4 very -- the grave-site number, where is that taken from and what does it
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As you can see -- I'm sorry. This
7 is basic information about each location. It's a kind of overview. As I
8 was going through everything, I was creating a sort of an outline or
9 overview for me to find things more easily. That is what I relied on.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I was talking about numbers. I see that the first
11 entry bears number 281; the second is 286; the third is 288. That at
12 least suggests that there was a list with sequential numbers. Is it
13 taken from any other list? What do these numbers stand for?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I copied it from different sources.
15 I can't recall exactly what the figures stand for precisely. The number
16 is unimportant to me specifically. There's no reason for me to deal with
17 it. What was important to me for my work were the co-ordinates the
18 exhumation dates, locations, designation of location, that is what was
19 important for my work.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it may -- if we are in these kind of numbers,
21 it suggests that there were over 200 and even goes far beyond that.
22 Numbers of grave-sites, is that a mass grave-site, is that an
23 individual grave? Because I see that the co-ordinates are quite
24 different as well. As far as I can see now, none of them corresponds
25 with another, which suggests a lot of graves and that may be relevant for
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The co-ordinates describe
3 particular locations and they have to vary from location to location.
4 When discussing specific events there were many exhumations and asanacija
6 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, sometimes if you have a mass grave the
7 co-ordinate would be the same, isn't it. You would have a lot of bodies
8 in exactly the same location. Yes. Okay. You apparently agree with
9 that. Now, if you have 200 or 300 different locations, then we are
10 apparently moving from mass graves to individual graves and therefore I'm
11 asking you what does this all mean? Are these people found in individual
12 graves, are these people found in mass graves and ...
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we go to the right of the table,
14 you will see the type of grave. Is it a mass grave, individual grave, is
15 it asanacija, meaning on the surface. But we need to go to the right of
16 the table.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's do so. Because we'd like to understand
18 what is presented to us as evidence.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's good. Each line describes a
20 location, and it is stated whether it is a primary or secondary mass
21 grave or is it part of asanacija. Every line stands for one location,
22 and it also includes some of my comments with regard to specific
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: When you say "every line," which line are you
25 talking about?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The lines from left to right. I'm
2 not discussing columns. I'm discussing the lines.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ORIE: I see two columns. One is MG, mass grave; and the
5 next column is type of grave.
6 Now, the mass grave, there are numbers with it. What do these
7 numbers stand for? For the number of dead people found there or --
8 what -- what does it mean?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is the total number of bodies
10 and parts of bodies found in a specific mass grave, be it primary or
11 secondary, as we can see in the next column.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Which seems to suggest that there were a lot
13 of different mass graves dealt with here. Because we have all different
14 numbers, 1 -- 288, 224, 242, 200, 305, 244. These are all different mass
15 graves then.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And do you have a complete list of mass graves which
18 were considered?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We see here the mass graves that
20 were encompassed in my work. It doesn't mean they are all here, and it
21 does not include such locations where mortal remains were found on the
22 ground. This is just a portion that was important to me for what I was
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: The question was: Do you have a complete list of
25 mass graves which you considered? Do you know how many mass graves
1 you -- you looked at, you considered?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the list more or less, the
3 one I dealt with.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did deal with a full list of all
6 mass or individual graves.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But just --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: That is not the question. The question is the
10 full list of the graves that you looked at, that you investigated, not
11 the full list of graves, of mass graves, but the list of those that you
12 considered. These ones, how many are they?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The list is before us. This is the
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So we move a little bit to the left, further
17 to the left of this.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: To the left. Not to the right.
19 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Then I have --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's it.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I would like to go to the beginning of this page.
23 Yeah. That's here. Here. Here. Here.
24 Now if you look at the heading in red, it says grave-site number.
25 Now, my -- from that, I read and I thought you explained that earlier,
1 that the 281 is the number of the grave. Is that what you said? At some
2 stage you said it didn't mean anything to you, but then you later said it
3 was the number of the grave.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the number of location
5 chronologically, either of a mass grave or a location where bodies were
6 found on the surface. That's all. It was unimportant to me. What was
7 important to me was to have the location, the date, what was found --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... you are
9 explaining something that I'm not asking.
10 Let me ask. We see on this page, the highest number is 344.
11 Assuming that that is -- I'm just making an assumption that is the
12 highest number of these graves here. Is it -- does it mean that, in
13 fact, you saw 344 -- or there were 344 graves around?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you are discussing the topic or
15 theme of my work, I did, say, 200 exhumations per day. In the course of
16 my work, over 700 were performed there were many exhumations an examples
17 of asanacija. So those figures are great.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: But a great number of people can be found in one
19 grave. I'm not talking about the number of people exhumed. I am not
20 talking about the number of graves from where exhumations took place.
21 I'm asking: Should we accept that the number of graves, whether they are
22 mass graves or single graves, goes up to 344.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Are you discussing a specific
24 event or are you talking about exhumations in general in Bosnia and
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not about a specific, I'm not asking about
2 exhumations. I'm talking about the number of graves out of which
3 exhumations took place. I'm saying is it your evidence that right
4 through the war the number of various graves that can be associated does
5 go as far as 344, possibly more because you didn't investigate all of
7 So 344 would be the number of graves the heading says grave-site
8 number. So number of the grave-site, that's what the heading says, and
9 I'm saying: Were there 344 grave-sites?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Bosnia and Herzegovina, there
11 were many grave-sites, many more than 344.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: You've answered my question. That's all I've been
13 asking for, for all this time.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Now, could I, a bit on the same subject. Could we
15 move slightly further to the right. Yes, there we are. That's what I
17 We see one column, type of grave. On the first entry, it says:
18 Secondary mass grave and the line before that, it says MG, mass grave,
19 and gives a number. You told us that that is the number of bodies
20 exhumed from that mass grave. Is that well understood?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could I ask you to move just a
22 little further to the right, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is good. Thank you.
25 It actually represents examples from the fourth group, as I refer
1 to it, that I found interesting.
2 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- as can you see --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Would you mind to answer my question.
5 288, did I well understand that, for the first entry, that 288 is
6 the number of persons exhumed from that mass grave?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is the total number. We are
8 discussing the column before the column where we see secondary mass
9 grave. So 288. It's the total number of bodies and bodily parts exhumed
10 from that specific mass grave. So full bodies and parts of bodies. And
11 then I classified it further.
12 JUDGE ORIE: So these classifications are done by you?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I worked on the column entitled:
14 Complete bodies. I checked that and I can explain why.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Did you check it or did you establish it?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I arrived at these figures by
17 checking the documents I had at my disposal, which I have already
18 referenced. I can explain what it means and what I did.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No, I now slowly start seeing what the document is
20 about. Took me a while but that's perhaps I'm a bit slow.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
22 Mr. MacDonald.
23 MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Just for the record to say that again the Prosecution was unaware
25 these were two different reports, nor had the Defence formatted them, nor
1 have we the underlying material.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's hereby on the record.
3 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. [Interpretation] You mentioned the fourth category. Please
6 explain what you wanted to say. We already dealt with the first three.
7 What would be the fourth?
8 A. In trying to trace the bodies of those who perished in the
9 breakthrough, what struck me as illogical was that there was a certain
10 number of complete bodies in graves defined as secondary mass graves. In
11 keeping with our practice and based on my experience in the sector and
12 that of my colleagues, it was illogical to have such high numbers of
13 complete bodies in secondary graves, because those bodies are usually dug
14 up by construction machinery and put on a truck and then unloaded from
15 the truck into the next grave after a certain period of time. So there
16 should have been decay of tissue and dispersion, literally put. The
17 bodies must have fallen apart to a certain extent, and that raised
19 JUDGE ORIE: I think no one asked the picture to be moved. Could
20 we go back to where we were. Yes.
21 So you're surprised by the number of complete bodies in the
22 secondary mass graves. Let's have a look at entry number 1, yes, we
23 leave it to that secondary mass grave, complete bodies 50, body parts
24 238. For the second, could you explain what body parts there means
25 because you said 224 was the number of bodies exhumed. Complete bodies,
1 224. And apparently some 47 other things remained there as well.
2 Do you know what that stands for, 47 cases BP or RAV01-?-? What
3 does that stand for?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now we're talking about a primary
5 grave at Ravnice Glogova.
6 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... we'll move onto
7 the next one. It's the secondary grave at entry number 3. Twenty-six
8 complete bodies, where 242 were exhumed.
9 Next item, secondary mass grave 59 complete bodies.
10 Next one, secondary mass grave out of 305, 9 complete bodies.
11 Next entry, 79 complete bodies out of 244. You say you were
12 surprised by the number because you would expect body parts to fall off.
13 If I read this, most of the bodies were incomplete and only a very
14 limited number anywhere between -- I would say anywhere between 5 and 25
15 or 30 per cent were complete bodies. What did then surprise you so much
16 about these numbers?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If a body part found in a mass
18 grave doesn't mean it's an entity in and of itself. As you can see, if
19 you look at the fourth secondary mass grave, 200 were exhumed, 200
20 complete body parts, out of those, there were 59 complete bodies and 98
21 entities arrived from the location in total.
22 It means that a number of different body parts can represent a
23 single entity. If we look at the sixth example of Kamenica Cancari 02;
24 244 was the total of remains exhumed. Out of that 79 complete bodies,
25 165 body parts and out of that, 113 were identified. In other words,
1 body parts -- a number of body parts usually means that they may belong
2 to a single set of bones so out of 113 total identified there were 79
3 complete bodies, and the rest of these identities were arrived at based
4 on the study of the body parts assembled rather than complete bodies.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Although it's not an answer to my question, I
6 noticed that where you earlier said that the number in the column mass
7 grave with a number was bodies exhumed and you apparently now are telling
8 me, which perhaps may be very logical that it's not bodies exhumed from
9 that, but that it could be bodies or body parts.
10 Please proceed.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you do, in this column where you say ID
12 total, you call that entities. What do you mean by entities?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Actually I meant to say identity.
14 Identity of a person.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ...
16 JUDGE ORIE: Does -- I do understand that that's then -- how many
17 individuals with distinct features could be established on the basis of
18 what was found in a mass grave; for example, by identification through
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It means what the final
21 number of those who were identified by DNA analysis was.
22 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
23 THE WITNESS: Sorry.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
25 Yes, Mr. MacDonald.
1 MR. MacDONALD: Just very briefly, Your Honour.
2 It appears from the answer to Mr. Lukic's question, the witness
3 states there should have been decay of tissue and dispersion, literally
4 put. And that, as a basis for his categorisation here, the Prosecution's
5 submission this is far outside of his expertise. He is not a forensic
6 pathologist, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: No. Though it could be part of the experience of
8 someone who is involved in identification. Because the different body
9 parts may play a role in double identification. So it's on the record,
10 but I would not be too much concerned about that.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. [Interpretation] Do you think the job is finished after producing
14 this table?
15 A. No. These are simply some of my observations based on experience
16 and expertise. I raised issues. As is generally the case concerning
17 these events, investigative measures need to be performed in order to see
18 why this was possible, how was it possible that there was such a high
19 number of complete bodies as well as the rest, how it all came about.
20 Q. You attended these exhumations.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did you see what kind of machinery was used?
23 A. For the most part, they were loaders with a fork --
24 Q. How big is this fork or spoon?
25 A. It can be up to 2 metres or so. Then diggers are also used with
1 the spoon moving from up/down to put the load onto a truck. That one is
2 about 1 and a half metres, I think. But I can't really say anything
3 specifically. It needs to be checked. I don't know what specific kind
4 of machinery was used to dig up the primary graves and how the load was
5 put onto trucks. Depends on specific cases. And I think it is
6 important; however, I do not have the necessary information to comment.
7 I do suppose, though, that similar machinery was used to the machinery
8 that we have.
9 Q. Let's look at page 2 briefly because there's a name we will need.
10 The third name on the page, Amir Zukanovic. According to the
11 statement of a witness he died at the beginning of the breakthrough.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are we on the right page?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the page. The fifth
15 MR. LUKIC: It's the fifth person. Sorry.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Do keep this name in mind.
19 Let us look at [In English] [Previous translation continues] ...
20 that this document is not for broadcast. It is P01901. It's ICMP list.
21 And we need page 209 in English. English version only, please. We don't
22 need B/C/S.
23 [Interpretation] We see that very name in the fourth line of this
24 document. Although there were witnesses who claimed that he was killed,
25 he is on this list.
1 In your view, is it fine to have somebody who is claimed to have
2 been killed found on the ICMP list?
3 A. I don't see anything strange with this person being on the list.
4 This is the list of missing persons as reported by their family members.
5 So we should have all those included who potentially died during the
6 breakthrough. These are all of the people who died through the
7 breakthrough under different circumstances and their families were not
8 familiar with their fate. So there is nothing there that would be in
9 dispute. I think one of the Judges also commented upon it when
10 Mr. Milutin Misic was testifying the date and place of disappearance as
11 designated here is only initial information in order to continue
12 searching for that person. I don't see anything problematic about this,
13 if I understood your question correctly.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure. But can I understand something about the
15 last part of your answer. You're saying it is initial information in
16 order to continue searching for that person.
17 I see this very number 4 person, it looks like this person's
18 remains were found in a grave-site in Cerska. Is there anything that
19 still needs to be done if he has been found and identified. We say he is
20 identified. What still has to be done with him?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a list with the first and
22 last name and everything else, including the preliminary information as
23 to where the person was reported to have gone missing. But specifically
24 the judicial and investigative information, it's investigation I don't
25 know where that was done and I don't know where the person was assumed to
1 have gone missing. This is a list to trace or search for missing
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... you said this
4 is a list which must be used to continue searching for the person. I'm
5 saying the last column says grave-site and my understanding -- if I
6 misunderstand, please tell me. My reading means that the first person
7 was found in Zeleni Jadar grave-site. Other one in Ravnice. Other one
8 in Sandici. My question to you was: If the remains are found in the
9 grave-site, why do you say their search must still be continued? They've
10 been found.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. In that specific case, yes.
12 All I said was that all the persons were there who were killed in the
13 breakthrough, in combat and everybody else is there as well. So I don't
14 see anything of dispute in the fact that that person is located there.
15 When I meant further investigation, I meant persons who had still not
16 been identified. Perhaps I made an error there. I focussed on the place
17 where it says date and place of disappearance. This is the starting
18 point for the information. This is where the process begins.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ...
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and what we have to do, first of all, is to
21 look at that statement of a person who gave information about when and
22 where he died because the quote is about the moment but just limited to
23 that. And that's, of course, what the Chamber would like to have a look
24 at, to be able to further explore what now appears on this list and
25 whether what that tells us.
1 Mr. Lukic, I'm looking at the clock. You said you needed ten
2 minutes. We went through a few things. Well, I think, as a matter of
3 fact, overall that you had your ten minutes and you had got far more
4 information by questions put by the Chamber.
5 MR. LUKIC: I finished. I just want to tender this document.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. LUKIC: So then we would like to hear from the Prosecution
8 how would they like to proceed. Obviously, they cannot finish today.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we don't need to do that in the presence of the
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is this document number?
12 MR. LUKIC: It's 1D06331.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: [Microphone not activated]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please activate your microphone.
16 THE REGISTRAR: 1D6331 will be Exhibit D1399 under seal.
17 MR. MacDONALD: Sorry, Your Honours. The Prosecution would
18 object to this document coming in at this time. There's a whole number
19 of reasons for that. Firstly, the late receipt of this, the lack of the
20 underlying materials. Beyond that, we consider this list, in essence, to
21 be part of the report. It's the analysis of the accused -- witness, my
22 apologies, and we consider it should have been part of his report. On
23 that basis, we would ask Your Honours to treat it in the same way. MFI
24 it just now, hear cross-examination on it, potentially some more things
25 and then decide in the due course of time whether Your Honours also
1 accept it or not.
2 MR. LUKIC: We do not object to this approach.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, I would like to have it MFI'd. I
4 would like to repeat the number. I've forgotten it, and it does not yet
5 already appear on the transcript.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: D1399.
7 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1D06331 will be MFI D1399, under seal.
8 JUDGE ORIE: D1399 is marked for identification.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: And why is it under seal?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Because the parties indicated that at least some of
11 the pages were containing confidential information. Therefore, it's
12 marked for identification, under seal.
13 Witness, you may already follow the usher.
14 [The witness stands down]
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: We were just considering how to proceed,
17 Mr. MacDonald. The first question is whether we'd try to finish the
18 cross-examination of this witness today which seems not to be feasible.
19 Because there's too many open matters, especially underlying materials
20 which are not clarified. That's one.
21 The second issue is that if such materials would be provided, we
22 should find a way to communicate with the witness what he's expected to
23 provide because the Defence, at this moment, is not in a position to
24 further sit down with him anymore.
25 Our initial thoughts now are that we would not start the
1 cross-examination today. That we would do that early February. And,
2 second, that the Defence and the Prosecution would sit together and to
3 make a list of materials, either by a precise description such as witness
4 statement of Mr. A, B, and C, referred to in this document, page
5 so-and-so, entry 3, and perhaps in more general terms, we'd like to have
6 any database produced by whatever -- I mean, you have gone through his
7 report. Sometimes it's clear what he relied on. Sometimes it's less
8 clear. And there, of course, we would -- you may not be in a position to
9 identify with utmost precision what you are seeking but at least you
10 could give a hint at what you need so as in order to prepare for
11 cross-examination. Those would be our thoughts at this moment. I give
12 you until after the break to consider that and perhaps even discuss it
13 amongst yourselves, and if we would not continue today, then I would have
14 a bit of a list of agenda items still to be considered today.
15 MR. MacDONALD: Just one comment, Your Honours. If you don't
16 mind, the Prosecution would request to begin cross-examination today, in
17 particular with the list my friend has gone over with the witness. We
18 believe that we can begin to cross-examine him effectively given some of
19 the materials we have.
20 JUDGE ORIE: You think it really be important to start. And how
21 much time would you need for that.
22 MR. MacDONALD: I would hope to finish with materials we have
23 found I would hope to be finish that topic today, Your Honours. If we
24 had about 40 minutes perhaps and then perhaps continue with the new
1 JUDGE ORIE: We have after the break we would have another 25
2 minutes and we could extend until, if that is agreeable for the Defence -
3 Mr. Lukic, could you carefully listen as well - we can continue today
4 until 3.00 at the ultimate. But we have a few matters as well we'd like
5 to raise. If you say you can make -- and if you prefer to start your
6 cross-examination and, well, let's say, use 40 minutes today, you would
7 have from ten minutes to 2.00 to 2.30 and then half an hour would be left
8 to deal with some agenda items. We'll consider that for a possibility
9 and then the witness to be re-called for further cross-examination.
10 Mr. Lukic, any comments on this.
11 MR. LUKIC: No comments at all. Whatever Your Honours find
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I wouldn't be so generous if I were you.
14 We take a break and resume at ten minutes to 2.00.
15 --- Recess taken at 1.27 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 1.50 p.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Have the parties met already to see how they could
18 organise getting additional background materials from the witness?
19 MR. MacDONALD: No, Your Honour. Not yet. And in terms of what
20 Your Honours thoughts were, the Prosecution would have the following
21 comments. That this witness appears to have brought material which my
22 friend refused to take and we don't know what's in there. We don't know
23 the universe of that material so in terms of making a list of what we
24 don't have, it's not possible for us to do that. So we would like all
25 the material that the witness brought, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see that point. The witness at one point in
2 time said that he consulted hundreds of thousands of documents. I don't
3 know whether you're seeking hundreds of thousands of documents. And the
4 reason why I referred to that is because sometimes it is clear that
5 relies on materials which is not available and there is a clear reference
6 to a statement of Witness A or B or C and to include to start with and if
7 you'd like to have the other 900.000 documents, then try to phrase it in
8 such a way.
9 MR. MacDONALD: I can say just now, Your Honour, certainly the
10 witness statements the witness has identified he relies upon. But
11 there's also, if Your Honour would recall, he said he checked databases
12 at his work. We need that as well.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: I guess what Judge Orie is trying to say is that
14 maybe, instead of asking for materials that he brought, you must ask fro
15 materials that he relied on for his report.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's -- Mr. Lukic.
17 MR. LUKIC: I know that we provided Mr. Pavlovic with the
18 documents disclosed by the Prosecution to us.
19 [The witness takes the stand]
20 MR. LUKIC: So that's why [Overlapping speakers] ...
21 JUDGE ORIE: If you have a list of documents you provided to the
22 expert then it might be helpful and therefore it's good if you would
23 meet, that you make a list of what those materials are.
24 MR. LUKIC: Those are batches we received from the Prosecution.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That may already assist. Perhaps not in
1 every detail.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: I apologise, Your Honour, but it's very clear
3 that this man brought materials that he refused to take and said it was
4 too late. That's what we want.
5 MR. LUKIC: Okay.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: As well as everything he reasonably relied on and
7 we can work that out.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's first start --
9 MR. LUKIC: Just for the record, we do not object to any
10 disclosure by this witness. I'm just telling you that really hundreds of
11 thousands of documents that he went through and whether he read
12 everything we don't know.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, well.
14 Mr. Pavlovic, we'll now start with the cross-examination of you.
15 We'll go on until approximately 2.30, perhaps 2.35. I do understand that
16 you feel a bit tired. That will not conclude your evidence in this
17 courtroom. We'll give you further instructions and we'll further address
18 this matter at the end of the first part of the cross-examination.
19 You'll now be cross-examined by Mr. MacDonald. Perhaps if you
20 move to him and -- yes, you wanted to ask me something?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. I don't know if I
22 have the right to say so. But, actually, I am not feeling very well.
23 Before the end of the previous session I was actually thinking about
24 asking you to cut the hearing short. I do have some physical limitations
25 in the neck area, and I am not feeling that well. So what I would like
1 to ask you, is if I may be excused from testifying further today, if we
2 could finish today, because I'm not able to continue. I'm concerned that
3 I will just simply not be able to focus enough and follow the proceedings
4 if we continue the way that I'm feeling now.
5 So that is what I wanted to ask you, Your Honour, if possible.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Before we decide on your request, I'd like to hear
7 from the parties. I'm especially interested to hear from the parties
8 because the Chamber felt that the Prosecution had a certain specific
9 interest in starting cross-examination today.
10 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, Your Honour, and if I may add, we will
11 address some of the examples that Mr. Lukic addressed with the witness,
12 and we believe we've found some of the documents that Your Honour was
13 asking for, that Mr. Pavlovic relied upon.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see that point. But do we -- the issue was
15 whether we could continue at this very moment or not. That's the issue.
16 It is clear that you had -- apparently a keen interest in starting today
17 rather than to wait for another four or five weeks, six weeks. If
18 there's any specific point which you'd like to raise in a shorter period
19 of time, we'd like to know.
20 MR. MacDONALD: Not beyond the submissions we've made. If the
21 witness is feeling ill, it's in Your Honours' hands with regards to what
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
24 MR. LUKIC: I just know that Mr. Pavlovic cannot sit for a long
25 time. While we were working he had to stand up and stand for a while --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated]
2 MR. LUKIC: What?
3 JUDGE ORIE: We'll not invite him to stand to give his testimony.
4 That's ...
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ORIE: We'll meet your request, Witness. That is, that
7 we'll not yet adjourn but at least that we'll not continue to hear your
8 evidence at this moment, and we'd like to see you back somewhere early in
9 February. Perhaps it would be best to start with this witness as the
10 first witness.
11 I, again, instruct you that you should not speak about your
12 testimony with whomever or communicate in writing, whatever, but whatever
13 means, testimony already given or still to be given and that would be
14 valid for the -- until you reappear in this courtroom.
15 Apart from that, you may have noticed that this Chamber was often
16 seeking access to materials underlying either your report or certainly
17 the document we discussed where you gave us, you said, examples of -- of
18 where you had question marks, at least matters you thought to be further
19 explored. That's one category.
20 Then, second, you apparently brought materials to The Hague where
21 there was insufficient time for the Defence to go through them with you.
22 Could you tell us how much material that is?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's a lot. A lot of material that
24 I went through. But what I've understood what this refers to, it refers
25 to this last material that we were going through. Mainly witness
1 statements, witnesses who saw people killed during the breakthrough. And
2 I think that is what is missing. Certain statements.
3 At this point, though, I cannot say whether I found the
4 statements in the documents that I received from the Defence. I assume
5 that that was so for the majority of the cases and then also --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Whatever you brought to The Hague, are you willing
7 to share that with the Chamber and you give it to the Victims and Witness
8 Section? Because you're not in a position to discuss the matters either
9 with the Prosecution or with the Defence. Are you willing to share all
10 that material you brought to The Hague with the Tribunal?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course, of course, that's what I
12 was told by the Defence also when I received it that it was strictly
13 confidential that I cannot show it anywhere, and that when we finish with
14 my testimony, to return the entire material to the Defence. And all the
15 rest that I used --
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... all the rest
17 that you used ...
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The rest that I used, if it's not
19 from the database of documents that I got from the Defence, of course,
20 I'm going to make everything available to you. Because, of course, I
21 wouldn't have used it in the first place if I didn't intend to provide
22 that as documentation that I used in the process of my work. I hope that
23 that is clear.
24 JUDGE ORIE: You're therefore invited -- could you make that
25 available in electronic format, those materials.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course, of course.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Because if it's a lot perhaps it's better to
3 start -- and would you keep any originals that you may have apart from
4 giving electronic versions to the Victims and Witness Section. That
5 would also include databases, whatever you used, because we were
6 struggling with the supporting materials.
7 When do you think you could make that available, if it's ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tomorrow. I'm going to sit down
9 today to try and find everything and to give it to the service, as you
10 called it, the section for Victims and Witnesses. I assume that they
11 will get in touch with me, that they will be in touch with me, so that I
12 could give these materials to them.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. They certainly will be in touch with you.
14 It's highly appreciated that you want to do it immediately that the
15 Prosecution has sufficient time to further review those materials.
16 Well, I have given you my instructions. I would like to thank
17 you for your co-operation in providing us the materials.
18 Mr. Lukic.
19 MR. LUKIC: Yes, I'm sorry, also if Mr. Pavlovic used any
20 database apart from our database maybe, I don't know, what he used, maybe
21 something -- it's something from other organisations. Maybe he should be
22 instructed to share that with Your Honours as well.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I thought that was included in my instructions
24 but to avoid any lack of clarity. Whatever you used as databases also
25 perhaps what you didn't get from the Defence, if you have any other
1 databases which I used, don't hesitate to include those in the materials
2 you are providing to us.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Including the materials that I
4 received from the Defence. That is also what you mean, isn't it? Right.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Everything. Because we want to avoid that in a
7 month's time, we are sitting here and have to establish that we still do
8 not have access or at least, the parties would not have access to
9 underlying materials.
10 Then you excused for the moment. You'll hear when -- through the
11 Victims and Witness Section when we'd like to see you back. If there are
12 any dates when you are not available - I'm thinking in terms of the first
13 half of February - please inform the Victims and Witness Section about
14 unavailability in that period of time.
15 THE WITNESS: Mm-hm.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then you may now follow the usher. I hope that you
17 feel better soon.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much for your
20 [The witness stands down]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll use the time to deal with a few matters
22 on the agenda. The Chamber always tries to have an empty agenda before
23 we go for longer periods of recess. In order to avoid any
24 misunderstanding when I announced an extended session prior to that we
25 had explored to that extent that was possible at all, and, again, we
1 found great co-operation by those assisting us in this courtroom.
2 I'll start with a first item dealing with final trial briefs.
3 Last week, the parties made submissions in court in relation to
4 the final trial briefs. The Chamber grants the parties' request to fix
5 the word limit to 300.000 words. In relation to timing, the Chamber
6 considers that it is still too early to address how many weeks or months
7 after future events the final briefs should be filed. There are a number
8 of Defence witnesses remaining, the Chamber may take some time to decide
9 on all evidentiary matters prior to closing the Defence case. There will
10 be a rebuttal and possible rejoinder case and the Chamber may require
11 some time finally to close the entire case with the filing of the last
12 evidentiary decision.
13 The Chamber has taken note of the parties' submissions but
14 maintains that any periods of non-sitting, for example, this coming
15 January, must also be used by the parties for its final brief
16 preparations. The Chamber will not grant an extended period of time
17 after the close of the case for the preparation of final briefs,
18 especially if the parties had various opportunities to prepare prior to
19 the closure.
20 I move onto my next item, and we move into private session for
22 [Private session]
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: We're now in open session, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
18 Next item deals with documents used with Yasushi Akashi.
19 During Akashi's testimony on the 23 and 24th of November, exhibit
20 numbers were reserved for a number of documents pending the Prosecution
21 uploading excerpts. The Prosecution informed the Defence and the Chamber
22 via an e-mail on the 26th of November that the excerpts had been uploaded
23 into e-court. The Defence has not objected. In light of this, the
24 Chamber instructs the Registry to carry out the following changes:
25 1. Replace P7692 with the B/C/S excerpt and corresponding
1 English translation uploaded into e-court as Rule 65 ter number 11148a.
2 2. Replace P7693 with the excerpted pages uploaded into e-court
3 as Rule 65 ter number 02393a.
4 3. Attach the excerpted pages uploaded into e-court as Rule 65
5 ter number 04472a to P7704.
6 P7692, P7693, and P7704 are hereby admitted into evidence.
7 Next item still deals with associated exhibits related to the
8 same witness.
9 On 23 November the Defence stated that it would try, at the end
10 of the witness's testimony, to reduce the number of associated exhibits
11 tendered pursuant to Yasushi Akashi's Rule 92 ter motion. This can be
12 found at transcript pages 41679 through 682. Ultimately, there was
13 insufficient time to give the Defence the opportunity to do so in court.
14 The Chamber hereby gives the Defence one week to make submissions on this
16 Next item deals with P7541 tendered through Radoje Vojvodic.
17 On the 8th of September of this year, P7541, a list of military
18 observers, was marked for identification, pending the provision of an
19 English translation. This can be found at transcript page 38837.
20 On the 10th of December, the Prosecution informed the Chamber and
21 the Defence via e-mail that an English translation has been uploaded
22 under doc ID 0687-4507-ET. The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to
23 attach this translation to the original and admits P7541 into evidence.
24 Should the Defence dispute the translation, it may inform the
25 Prosecution and the Chamber within a week, but should then submit the
1 document to CLSS for verification.
2 Next item is an oral decision on the admission of P7449 through
3 P7453 all tendered through expert witness Ewa Tabeau on 2 July 2015
4 during the reopening of the Prosecution's case in-chief.
5 In relation to P7449 through P7453, Tabeau's proof of death
6 report for Tomasica, the corrigendum to the report, the annexes to the
7 report, an addendum to the report, and a PowerPoint presentation of the
8 report, the Defence submits that it does not have access to Tabeau's
9 "keys" matching victims and therefore the report's methodology is up
11 This can be found at transcript pages 36879 to 36881.
12 The Defence also submits at transcript page 36879 that the:
13 "...numerous errors in the report and the perceived bias of the witness
14 do not render the report to be of an expert such that it would assist the
16 Furthermore, in relation to P7453, the PowerPoint presentation,
17 the Defence argues that to the extent it provides additional information
18 beyond that contained in the report, such information was not provided in
19 a timely manner in accordance Rule 94 bis, since it was only provided to
20 the Defence on 30th of June 2015, just days before the witness testified.
21 These submissions can be found on transcript page 36883.
22 In response, the Prosecution submits that P7453, the PowerPoint
23 presentation is merely a exemplification of the report to facilitate the
24 presentation of Tabeau's evidence in court and that while it includes
25 some corrections to the report, those corrections were already included
1 in P7450 which is the corrigendum. These submissions can be found on
2 transcript page 36884. In relation to the "keys": The Prosecution
3 submits that the methodology is clearly spelled out in the report and
4 also refers to it included in previous reports already admitted into
5 evidence. This submission can be found at transcript page 36880.
6 The Chamber recalls that the applicable law for the admission of
7 evidence is set out in Rule 89(C) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence,
8 which allows a chamber to admit any relevant evidence which it deems to
9 have probative value. Although Rule 94 bis does not provide specific
10 guide-lines on the admissibility of expert evidence, the jurisprudence
11 has established the following requirements for the admissibility of an
12 expert report: The proposed witness is qualified as an expert, the
13 expert report is relevant and of probative value, and the content of the
14 expert report falls within the accepted expertise of the expert witness.
15 The Chamber notes its decisions of the 7th of November, 2013 and
16 the 24th of February, 2015 recognizing Tabeau as an expert in the field
17 of demographics and statistics more generally, and that the proof of
18 death report for Tomasica and the related documents fall within the scope
19 of her expertise.
20 The Chamber finds that Tabeau's proof of death report for
21 Tomasica and the related documents are relevant because they relate
22 directly to the re-opening of the Prosecution's case - namely, exhumation
23 of the Tomasica grave-site.
24 In relation to the Defence submissions about not having access to
25 Tabeau's "keys" and that the reports methodology is unclear, the Chamber
1 notes that the report's methodology is set out in section 2 of the report
2 and therefore this submission is unsubstantiated. Further, the Chamber
3 understands that the Prosecution had offered previously to make these
4 "keys" available once they had been recreated. This can be found at
5 transcript page 36880. To the extent that the Prosecution has not made
6 these "keys" available to the Defence as to today's date, the Chamber
7 invites the Prosecution to make them available to the Defence at its
8 earliest possible convenience.
9 With regard to the Defence submissions concerning errors and
10 bias, the Chamber does not exclude the possibility that errors and
11 elements that could be perceived as expressions of bias could reach a
12 level so as to deprive an expert report of its probative value. The
13 Chamber has admitted expert reports in this case that contain some errors
14 and were not always entirely free from elements that could be perceived
15 as expressions of bias. In its evaluation of the expert reports, as with
16 all evidence, the Chamber will consider such errors and elements when
17 assessing the weight to be accorded to the evidence. The Defence has not
18 demonstrated that the errors and alleged bias reach such a level so as to
19 deprive the relevant documents of their probative value. The Chamber
20 therefore finds that Tabeau's proof of death report and the related
21 documents have probative value and are admissible pursuant to Rule 89(C)
22 of the Rules.
23 The Chamber considers P7453, the PowerPoint presentation of the
24 report, to be a demonstrative exhibit only and therefore finds that the
25 Defence concerns in relation to the timing of its disclosure and its
1 content are without merit.
2 Therefore, the Chamber considers that P7449 through P7453 meet
3 the standards of admission pursuant to Rules 89(C) and 94 bis of the
4 Rules and admitted them into evidence.
5 P7451 and P7452 are to remain under seal.
6 And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
7 I now move on to the Rule 92 bis attestation for the redacted
8 statement of Witness Miroslav Homa.
9 On 18 November, the Chamber conditionally admitted
10 Miroslav Homa's redacted Rule 92 bis statement, pending the filing of the
11 attestation and declaration. On 19 November the Chamber noted that the
12 unredacted witness statement had been uploaded into e-court, and
13 requested that the Defence upload or release the redacted witness
14 statement. The redacted statement and required attestation and
15 declaration have since been uploaded under doc ID 1D29-0168.
16 The Chamber instructs the Registry to replace D1360 with the
17 newly uploaded documents and hereby admits D1360 into evidence.
18 I now move to excerpts of documents used with Milos Kovic.
19 During the testimony of Milos Kovic on 30th of November and the
20 1st of December, P7724 was marked for identification, while P7723, P7742,
21 P7743 and P7752 were reserved, all of which were pending excerpts to be
22 uploaded into e-court. On the 9th, the 11th and the 14th of December,
23 the Prosecution, via e-mail, informed Chamber and Defence that it had
24 uploaded into e-court revised versions of the relevant documents bearing
25 Rule 65 ter numbers 07617a, 03580a, 07871a, 02368a, and 19650a
1 respectively and requested replacement and admission of all
2 aforementioned revised excerpts.
3 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace P7723,
4 P7724, P7742, P7743, and P7752 with the excerpts uploaded into e-court
5 and admits them into evidence.
6 The Defence has no objection to the admission of P7752 and has
7 one week to revisit the four other documents.
8 I now move to excerpts of documents used with Mitar Kovac and
9 Milos Kovic.
10 During the testimony of Mitar Kovac and Milos Kovic on the
11 19th of November and 30th of November, excerpts of documents bearing
12 Rule 65 ter number 33442 were put to the witnesses. The document was
13 tendered through Milos Kovic and P7718 was reserved for excerpts to be
14 uploaded into e-court.
15 On 11th of December, the Prosecution via e-mail informed the
16 Chamber and the Defence that the relevant excerpts had been uploaded into
17 e-court under Rule 65 ter number 33442b.
18 The Chamber instructs the Registry to replace P7718 with the
19 newly uploaded excerpts and admits it into evidence. The Defence has one
20 week to revisit the matter.
21 I now move to the remaining issue from the testimony of Ostoja
22 Marjanovic, P7624.
23 On 9th November, this number was reserved for excerpts of
24 document bearing Rule 65 ter number 33385 which is the transcript of the
25 witness, Ostoja Marjanovic's prior interview with the Prosecution. This
1 can be found at transcript page 40996. On 11 December, the Prosecution
2 advised the Chamber and Defence via e-mail that the excerpts had been
3 uploaded into e-court under Rule 65 ter number 33385b. The Chamber
4 hereby instructs the Registry to assign P7624 to these excerpts and
5 admits into evidence and the Defence has one week to revisit the matter.
6 A few remaining issues from the testimony of Mile Dosenovic.
7 D1195. On the 13th of August, 2015, D1195, a radio intercept was
8 marked for identification, under seal, pending English translation.
9 On the 28th of October, the Defence advised via e-mail that the
10 translation had been uploaded under doc ID 1D26-3907. The Prosecution
11 responded, confirming that it did not object to the translation. The
12 Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to attach the translation to D1195
13 and admits D1195 into evidence under seal.
14 D1196. On the 13th of August, D1196, a map, was marked for
15 identification, under seal.
16 On the 30th of October, the Prosecution informed the Chamber and
17 the Defence via e-mail that it does not object to its admission but that
18 the map is already in evidence as part of D1200. The Chamber hereby
19 instructs the Registry to mark D1196 as not admitted.
20 P7499. On the 17th of August, P7499, a military document, was
21 marked for identification pending the verification of its translation.
22 On the 30th of October, the Prosecution informed the Chamber and
23 the Defence via e-mail that a revised translation had been uploaded into
24 e-court under doc ID 0051-0433-1-ET.
25 The Defence responded on the 3rd of November confirming that it
1 did not object to the revised translation, and the Chamber hereby
2 therefore instructs the Registry to replace the translation of P7499 with
3 the revised one and admits P7499 into evidence.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will review what I said about D1196,
6 whether there's any potential mistake there, and if so we'll revisit that
7 matter after the winter recess.
8 Mr. Tieger.
9 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President. This may be overcautious,
10 but could we move quickly into private session for one matter.
11 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
12 [Private session]
5 [Open session]
6 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
8 Remaining issue from the testimony of Ostoja Marjanovic, P7625.
9 On the 9th of November of this year, P7625 was reserved for various
10 excerpts of documents bearing Rule 65 ter numbers 33381 and 33383, which
11 are transcripts from the witness, Ostoja Marjanovic's prior testimony in
12 the Stakic case. This can be found at transcript page 41001.
13 On the 11th of December, the Prosecution advised the Chamber and
14 the Defence via e-mail that the excerpts had be uploaded into e-court
15 under 65 ter number 33381a. The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to
16 assign P7625 to these excerpts and admits it into evidence. The Chamber
17 has one week to revisit the matters -- the Defence. Apologies.
18 I move on to the admission of B/C/S translations.
19 During the testimony of Witness Yasushi Akashi, a number of
20 exhibits were admitted into evidence without B/C/S translations, and a
21 number were marked for identification, pending B/C/S translations.
22 The Prosecution has since informed the Defence and the Chamber
23 that the relevant translations have been uploaded into e-court. Should
24 the Defence dispute any of the translations, it is free, as always, to
25 seek verification from CLSS and revisit the matter. In light of this,
1 the Chamber instructs the Registry to carry out the following changes:
2 Attach the B/C/S translation uploaded into e-court as doc ID
3 R001-5622-BCST to P7694.
4 Attach the B/C/S translation uploaded into e-court as doc ID
5 R001-3977-BCST to P7695.
6 Attach the B/C/S translation uploaded into e-court as doc ID
7 R001-4194-BCST to P7698.
8 Attach the B/C/S translation uploaded into e-court as doc ID
9 R013-9911-BCST to P7701 MFI.
10 Attach the B/C/S translation uploaded into e-court as doc ID
11 R001-5622-BCST to P7703 MFI.
12 And attach the B/C/S translation uploaded into e-court as doc ID
13 R010-4879-BCST to P7705 MFI.
14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
15 JUDGE ORIE: P7701, P7703, and P7705 are now admitted into
17 The Registry has drawn my attention to the fact that portions of
18 the transcript may be missing. I think we have four items.
19 I take that the missing parts will be worked over this evening,
20 but the parties could verify how ... I'll copy the relevant portion so as
21 for both ourselves and for the parties to further later verify whether
22 the transcript is complete in this respect.
23 And perhaps I should slow down.
24 With regard to P7702, the record did not accurately reflect that
25 this document was admitted into evidence. This can be found at
1 transcript page T41779. The Chamber hereby places on the record that
2 P7702 is admitted into evidence.
3 I have another five items to go, so we'll most likely finish
4 before 3.00.
5 Next item, translation verification for Exhibit D775.
6 On the 26th of August of this year, the Chamber invited the
7 Defence to verify the translation of Exhibit D775.
8 On the 21st of October, the Defence informed the Chamber and the
9 Prosecution via e-mail that a complete translation had been uploaded into
10 e-court under doc ID 1D26-2872. The Chamber hereby instructs the
11 Registry to replace the current translation of D775 with the document
12 bearing doc ID 1D26-2872. The Prosecution has one week to revisit the
14 Exhibit P4909. This exhibit, a military order signed by the
15 accused, was admitted into evidence on 13 February 2014. The Prosecution
16 e-mailed the Chamber and the Defence on the 20th of November, 2015
17 advising that a revised English translation had been uploaded into
18 e-court under doc ID 0280-8993-1-ET. The Chamber hereby instructs the
19 Registry to replace the English translation of Exhibit P4909 with the
20 revised one and gives the Defence one week to revisit the matter.
21 Next item deals with the replacement of the translation of
22 Exhibit P7469. This is an article published in the Toronto Star and was
23 admitted into evidence on 22 October 2015. The Prosecution e-mailed the
24 Chamber and the Defence on the 1st of December, advising that a revised
25 B/C/S translation had opinion uploaded into e-court under doc ID
2 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the B/C/S
3 translation of Exhibit P7469 with the revised one and gives the Defence
4 one week to revisit the matter.
5 P235. Exhibit P235 was admitted into evidence under seal on the
6 24th of September, 2012. The Prosecution e-mailed the Chamber and the
7 Defence on 1st of December advising that a revised English translation
8 had been uploaded into e-court under doc ID 0531-6633-1-ET.
9 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the English
10 translation of Exhibit P235 with the revised one and gives the Defence
11 one week to revisit the matter.
12 Last item, Exhibit P7072. This exhibit, a document confirming
13 Jadranko Palija's military service was admitted into evidence on 28th of
14 January 2015. The Chamber instructed the Registry to replace the English
15 translation of this exhibit on the 17th of November and gave the Defence
16 one week to revert.
17 On the 1st of December, one week after the deadline set by the
18 Chamber, the Defence e-mailed the Prosecution advising that there was one
19 small error in the revised translation. On the 1st of December, the
20 Prosecution responded, advising that a revised English translation had
21 been uploaded into e-court under doc ID 0049-1779-2-ET.
22 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the
23 translation of Exhibit P7072 with the revised one.
24 This was the last item on our ...
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just verify for myself whether I had read --
2 earlier in today's session a ...
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE ORIE: My agenda is empty. Is there anything the parties
5 would like to raise?
6 Nothing. Then I put on the record again that Judge Fluegge was
7 not with us today. Yesterday it was announced he was unable sitting for
8 a relatively short period of time but that covered these two days.
9 Lastly, it is the last day before the recess. We'll not be in
10 court for quite a number of weeks. In between we have holidays, in which
11 many of us may celebrate religious ceremonies, has a religious meaning;
12 some in December, some in January. I wish that everyone finds, though
13 the circumstances under which we are may be quite different, but the
14 Chamber wishes everyone to find what it seeks during this recess period,
15 either religiously or just not in relation to religion. That's what we
16 wish you.
17 We stand adjourned, and we'll resume, I think on the 1st of
18 February, 2016.
19 We stand adjourned.
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.51 p.m.,
21 to be reconvened on Monday, the 1st day of
22 February, 2016, at 9.30 a.m.